Senthil added the comment:
The following issue/patch tries to addresses the same.
http://bugs.python.org/issue1462525
- It needs work though.
--
nosy: +orsenthil
_
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/iss
Senthil added the comment:
Can query strings be empty? I am unable to find an instance.
--
nosy: +orsenthil
__
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/
Senthil added the comment:
I am on Fedora Core 3, gnome 2.6 and I am unable to reproduce this issue.
Could this be a Ubuntu configuration bug. Like adding " quotes after %s
for the firefox command?
--
nosy: +orsenthil
__
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED
Senthil added the comment:
Okay. I found the status later. It was fixed then with Python 2.6 which
I am using.
__
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/
Senthil added the comment:
Hi Sean,
This is a very minor issue (IMO) with Python 2.4. Why did you assign it
to gvanrossum?
Makes me wonder at your assignments.
Thanks,
Senthil
__
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/
Senthil added the comment:
Hi,
The patch attached required a complete rewrite. I am attaching the
modified patch, which will just substitute socket.gethostbyname with a
function gethost_addrinfo which internally uses getaddrinfo and takes
care of the IPv4 or IPv6 addresses translation.
jjlee
Changes by Senthil:
_
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue1675455>
_
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mai
Senthil added the comment:
I have started this work at
http://svn.python.org/projects/sandbox/trunk/urilib/
as a part of G-SoC, yes taking it to web-sig would be appropriate and I
shall do so. techtonik, you might want to review it urilib and we can
discuss it further.
Thanks,
--
nosy
Senthil added the comment:
I agree with facundobatista here.
1) I am not sure, if what you mention that doing POST in the 302
redirect url does not carry forward the POST data. Some examples would
help to verify that and if this is case, IMO its a bug in urllib2.
2) You mention solution 1 as RFC
Senthil added the comment:
Hello Andres,
I think we are mixing up 2 or 3 things. Here are my comments.
1) urllib2 POST issue.
- Discussion broke on this. No conclusion.
2) GET Request.
>> If we create a GET request (handling 302 as 303) we should
>> remove the content length hea
Senthil added the comment:
Not really.
RFC 1808, on which urlparse module is based, defines the following for
the PATH component when joining the relative URL to Base URL.
Step 6: The last segment of the base URL's path (anything
following the rightmost slash "/"
Senthil added the comment:
Yes, you are right.
test_urlparse also does not consider the scenarios wherein the relative url
+starts with a query like ?y.
This needs to be addressed. I shall code the patch to fix it.
__
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Here is my analysis:
>>> import urllib2
>>> url = "http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_9216417";
>>> content = urllib2.urlopen(url).read()
>>> print content
>>>
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
The issue is not just with null character. If you observe now the
diretion is 302-302-200 and there is no null character.
However, still urllib2 is unable to handle multiple redirection properly
(IIRC, there is a portion of code to handle mu
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Just try it this way.
>>> print urlparse.urljoin('http://site.com/', 'path/../path/.././path/./')
http://site.com/path/
>>>
The difference is the inital '/' in the second argument.
Human inter
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Btw, Thank you for the exciting report monk.e.boy. :-)
There are many hidden in urlparse,urllib*. I hope you will have fun time
finding them (and fixing them too :)
And one general comment. If the bug is valid, Python official
Documentation
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
parse_qs and parse_qsl moved to urlparse with this patch.
I dont think urlencode would be a good method for urlparse. But this
will cease to exist with the addressing of 3108.
--
keywords: +patch
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/fil
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
> The documentation of the tokenize module says: "The line passed is the
> *logical* line; continuation lines are included."
>
> I suggest that this will be changed to something like "The line passed
> is the
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Attaching the patch to fix this issue. I deliberated upon this for a
while and came up with the approach to:
1) fix the port issue, wherein urlparse should technically recognize the
':' separator for port from ':' aft
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
This issue no longer exists. I verified the bug report on the trunk and
urlparse() and urlunparse methods behave properly on subsquent usages on the
same url.
>>> urlparse.urlparse(urlparse.urlunparse(urlparse.urlparse('file://
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
I shall give it a try and come out with results asap. Shall take
Facundo's help (my GSoC mentor).
--
nosy: +orsenthil
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
The HTTPSConnection class derives from HTTPConnection and the methods in
the HTTPConnection assume that 1) It is either over the default HTTP
port or 2) Over a different port (be it different HTTP port(8080?) or
443 for HTTPS etc) and in tha
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Yes, you are correct. I misunderstood the issue and the patch.
Patch seems good to fix that. Sorry for the confusion and thank you.
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
> This is on Linux with latest py3k branch:
>
> test test_urllibnet failed -- Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "/home/cartman/Sources/py3k/Lib/test/test_urllibnet.py", line
> 145, in test_bad_addr
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
I saw this coming. I am working on this Mark, Georg. Will be done with
this by Saturday (21st-Jun). issue2885 is not closed yet and mentions
about docs and other things pending.
--
nosy: +ors
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
+1 to support this bug entry. Even though I have wide-monitor (1680x1050),
keeping such a wide left side margin is a pain when reading the new docs. I was
looking for the settings if there is any way to turn off the left navigation or
chan
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Hi Georg,
Updated all the required docs and Committed revision 64476.
Let me know if any more changes required.
Thanks,
Senthil
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
- Docs updated.
- Still pending: 2to3 updates and Deprecation warnings.
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
This issue is valid in Python2.5. I verified it on a Windows. The fix
suggested
Changing:
os.system(cmd + ' ' + filename)
to
os.system('%s "%s"' % (cmd,filename))
in pydoc.tempfilepager al
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
I am attaching the modified patch, which addresses the port issue
properly and handles 'http:', 'https:' only URLS. Also included the
tests for it.
Facundo, I gave sufficient thought on raising an Exception for URLS not
s
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10570/issue754016.patch
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10496/issue600362.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10771/issue600362-py26.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10772/issue600362-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
- Updated patches for Python 2.6 and Python 3.0
- Moved the tests.
- Updated docs.
Somebody please review this so that it can checked in.
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
--
type: -> feature request
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue1675455>
___
___
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
This is addressed in issue600362.
--
nosy: +orsenthil
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file9907/issue2275.patch
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Issue applicable to Py2.6 and Py3K. Previous patch attached was wrong.
Removed it.
--
versions: +Python 2.6, Python 3.0
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Please have a look at this patch.
- Included a CaseInsensitiveDict Lookup for Headers interface.
- Headers will now be .title()-ed instead of .capitalized() ed.
- Included Tests for the changes made.
In the test_urllib2, I have not remove
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
This bug is not related to Python Stdlib. There isn't a module by name
urlgrabber in Python Stdlib and the author is referring to
http://linux.duke.edu/projects/urlgrabber/help/urlgrabber.grabber.html
Author should move his suggestion to
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
>> Senthil, could you handle this?
Sure, I shall take this up, Facundo.
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.py
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
This is a really quick fix. Someone with tracker admin access can apply
the patches and close this.
[Applies to py26 and py3k]
--
keywords: +patch
versions: +Python 2.6, Python 3.0 -Python 2.5
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/fil
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10851/issue3045-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10849/issue2275-py26.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Here is the final patch for Py26 and Py3k including the Docs and Misc/News.
Thanks you,
Senthil
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10862/issue2275-py26.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTE
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
--
versions: -Python 2.5
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10863/issue2275-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
I also removed the Python 2.5 from the Version, as I don't think these
changes will be back ported.
After the application of patch, this issue can be closed.
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PRO
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
--
nosy: +orsenthil
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue3300>
___
___
Python
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
--
nosy: +orsenthil
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue3316>
___
___
Python
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
> John J Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
>
> * The patch looks like it will break code that uses .header_items(),
> which is not acceptable.
Nope, it does not break. If the concern was subclassing dict may have
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Sorry for the delay and my miss in further communication on this issue.
I would like to take this issue in two fronts for its closure.
1) Issue with headers .capitalize() vs .title()
2) Documenting the Interface
With respect to point 1), I
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10862/issue2275-py26.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10863/issue2275-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file11023/issue2275-py26.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file11024/issue2275-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
I am submitting a revised patch for this issue.
I did some analysis on the history of this issue and found that this
.capitalize() vs .title() changes had come up earlier too (
issue1542948)and decision was taken to:
- To retain the Header for
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Yes, I agree with you, Roman.
I have made changes to urlparse.urljoin which would behave confirming to
RFC3986. The join of BASE ("http://a/b/c/d;p?q";) with REL("?y") would
result in "http://a/b/c/d;p?y";
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Patch for py3k
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file11054/issue1432-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file9035/urlparse.patch
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
I agree with Benjamin on this issue, describing what is a "File like Object" is
so much un-needed in Python and especially at urlopen function. Users have been
able to understand and use it properly from a long time.
--
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
--
nosy: +orsenthil
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue3466>
___
___
Python
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
I was NOT able to Reproduce it in IDLE 3.0b2 running on Linux. Would you
like to try with 3.0b2 and also do.
tjreedy: I did not properly get your comment. When you open Idle
instance and create a new Document, cut-paste the code, and Ru
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
>> What is the expected encoding of the pre_install_script file?
I think, the pre_install_script will be provided by the user.
It would be safe to assume "UTF-8" for the encoding of pre_install_script
-
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
* scriptor Matt Giuca, explico
>
> I think the biggest problem I have is the existence of fromhex. It's
> really strange/inconsistent to have a fromhex without a tohex.
Except, when we look at the context. This is bytes cl
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Hi Facundo,
I think, we can go ahead and commit the changes. Got a response in
Web-SIG that,previous RFC2396 listed behavior is invalid (in a practical
sense) and the current patch fixes it.
___
Python t
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Facundo, Shall we go ahead with committing these changes?
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
I could reproduce this issue on trunk and p3k branch. The patch attached
by Adrianna Pinska "appropriately" fixes this issue. I agree with the
logic. Attaching the patch for py3k with the same fix.
Thanks,
Senthil
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
The submitted patch has problems. It does not correctly solve this issue
(which I want to confirm, if there is issue at all after understanding
the logic behind unredirected_headers). My explanation of this issue and
comments on the patch i
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
The problem with the patch was:
The attached patch modifies the add_header() and
add_unredirected_header() method to remove the existing headers of the
same name alternately in the headers and unredirected_hdrs.
What we obse
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Hi Facundo,
This issue/comments somehow escaped from my noticed, initially. I have
addressed your comments in the new set of patches.
1) Previous patch Docs had issues. Updated the Docs patch.
2) Included message in cgi.py about parse_qs, par
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file7/issue600362-py3k-v2.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10771/issue600362-py26.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10772/issue600362-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Ah, I that was a simple fix. :) I very much overlooked the problem after
being so much given the hints at the web-sig.
I have some comments on the patch, Facundo.
1) I don't think is a good idea to include that portion in the
http_error
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file11133/issue2464-PATCH1.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Patch for py3k, but please test this before applying.
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file11134/issue2463-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
New submission from Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Attaching two patches to make the current urlparse library, especially
the relative url parsing and urljoin to be RFC3986 compliance.
I have included all the tests prescribed in RFC3986 and verified them
to pass with the patches.
Our p
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file11209/urlparse_rfc3986-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Hello Paul,
Have you beeing keeping track of urlparse changes in Python2.6? I
anaylzed your patch and read through the RFC3986 and have the
following comments:
1) The usage of this module is very diffirent from the current
urlparse mo
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
That was reason in making fix_broken in the urlparse in my patch, Facundo.
I had thought, it should be handled in urlparse module and if we make
changes in the urlparse.urlunparse/urlparse.urlparse, then we are
stepping into area which will b
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
As indicated by other posters, this *IS A* serious issue with urllib2 as
it does not do CONNECT for HTTPS through Proxy and it fails.
chrisl, I verified your patch and it works properly. I made some minor
changes (make a method private and c
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
--
components: +Library (Lib) -None
versions: +Python 2.6, Python 3.0
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file11333/issue1424152-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Test issue1424152-py26-test_urllib2net.diff and
issue1424152-py3k-test_urllib2net.diff patches has a dependency on
Issue1251 for failure scenarios.
Issue1251 deals with ssl module not support non-blocking handshakes. So,
when the HTTPS envir
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Added file:
http://bugs.python.org/file11335/issue1424152-py3k-test_urllib2net.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.o
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
This issue is yet not fixed for both Py2.6 and Py3k. The tests which are
present in code are not run (or disabled) in test_ssl.py
I understand, customers have a good chance of hitting upon this issue.
When ssl do_handshake() does not timeo
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Yes Janssen, I checked again and found it implemented in both trunk
(py26) and py3k. All the tests pass as well.
However, in one of my testcases for issue1424152, where I expected the
timeout to happen for do_handshake(), it did not take eff
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Facundo, I have updated the patch against the trunk. Added the
PendingDeprecationWarning for py26 and DeprecationWarning for py3k.
All tests pass ok. Please verify and plan to apply this patch before rc1.
Added file: http://bugs.pyth
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file11357/issue600362-py3k-v3.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file6/issue600362-py26-v2.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.
Changes by Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file7/issue600362-py3k-v2.diff
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
On the code against the trunk, I am getting the following error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "python3k_json.py", line 38, in
for result in search(query)['Result']:
File "python3k_json.py&
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
issue3763 mentions about the similar problem with json library.
The traceback posted illustrates the issue (c) mentioned here:
File "C:\Python30\lib\json\decoder.py", line 30, in errmsg
lineno, colno = linecol(doc, pos)
F
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
The patch and tests look fine to me, Gregory. I verified it against the
trunk. Should not we have it for py3k as well?
--
nosy: +orsenthil
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
I verified the patch against the trunk. It works fine and solves the issue.
But, I have a minor concern over 'ascii' as the default encoding, which you
have chosen.
For e.g, when I ran python3.0 nntplib.py (It would run tests, as
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
When the default encoding 'ascii' failed, I tried, 'utf-8', even that failed to
retrieve the message headers from comp.lang.python.
'latin1' succeeded. That was reason for my suggestion, considering 'lati
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
So, in effect, if we settle for ASCII as the default encoding, then the
attached patch is good enough. Someone should check this in.
Should it go in py3k, release? Because, without this patch(which is again
simple), nntplib is almost un
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
1) The section you refer to is 1.2 of RFC2617, which specifies the details on
Access Authentication in General and not specific to url redirects. So, I don't
think we should take it as a referece.
2) Under the section - 3.3 Digest Ope
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Anupam, if you are in a hurry, please patch your installation with
patches uploaded to this Issue1424152.
Otherwise, you got to wait for 2.6.1 or 3.0.1 for the above fix to come
as a release.
This is a duplicate issue, can be closed.
Senthil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
This is working as designed and Requestor has not supplied any further
information on why he thinks it a bug.
___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.pytho
1 - 100 of 1492 matches
Mail list logo
