Charles-François Natali <neolo...@free.fr> added the comment: > and if they do they thus really strive for data integrity, so call > fsync() as a fallback for the security which Apple provides.
Why? If I ask a full sync and it fails, I'd rather have an error returned so that I can take the appropriate decision (abort, roll-back, try a standard fsync) rather than have Python silently replace it by an fsync. > Also: we cannot let os.fsync() fail with ENOTTY!? Why not, since that's what the kernel returns? Once again, since the default behaviour doesn't change, this won't break any existing application. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11877> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
