[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Mark Dickinson added the comment: I don't know the zipfile module very well (i.e., at all), but as far as I can tell from looking at the source, there's no use of struct.pack('L', -1) in 2.6 onwards: it's only potentially a problem in 2.5 (and that isn't going to change, now that 2.5 is in secur

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Andreas Schawo added the comment: As I understand actually the zipfile module possibly creates damaged zip files after version 2.4 because of '\x00\x00\x00\x00' instead of '\xff\xff\xff\xff' as header offset. But without any error. I think the _struct.c should be cleaned in any case. Because we

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Mark Dickinson added the comment: Was zipfile ever fixed to avoid this deprecated behaviour? If not, is the fix fairly trivial? It would be nice to be able to finally turn these struct deprecation warnings into errors in Python 3.1 and/or Python 2.7. -- nosy: +marketdickinson _

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Georg Brandl added the comment: Committed to trunk in r68120. -- nosy: +georg.brandl status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Changes by Martin v. Löwis : -- versions: -Python 2.5, Python 2.5.3 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscri

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Changes by Martin v. Löwis : -- priority: deferred blocker -> release blocker ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Changes by Martin v. Löwis : -- priority: normal -> deferred blocker ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscri

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Martin v. Löwis added the comment: Thanks for the patch. Committed (along with a test case) as r67733, in the 2.5 branch. Porting to the other branches still needs to happen. Armin, if you want to make these changes, please go ahead. -- priority: release blocker -> normal resolution:

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Changes by Martin v. Löwis : -- priority: -> release blocker ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: ht

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: Attached struct-2.5-fix.diff. The tests still pass (both 32- and 64-bits). -- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file12326/struct-2.5-fix.diff ___ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: FWIW, struct.pack("I", "whatever") produces "\x00\x00\x00\x00" too. ___ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Martin v. Löwis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: Can you provide a fix within the next two days? Otherwise, I see little chance that this gets fixed in 2.5. -- nosy: +loewis ___ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: Ah, I should also mention that a fix of zipfile for 2.5 to no longer use the deprecated feature (and thus no longer cause DeprecationWarnings) also sounds like a good idea, in addition to the fix to the struct module.

[issue4228] struct.pack('L', -1)

New submission from Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: struct.pack('L', -1) raises a DeprecationWarning since Python 2.5, as it should. However, it also returns a different (and nonsensical) result than Python <= 2.4 used to: it returns '\x00\x00\x00\x00' instead of '\xff\xff\xff\xff'. This might