On 6/02/2009 4:21 PM, Volodymyr Orlenko wrote:
In the patch I submitted, I simply check if the name of the supposed
module ends with ".exe". It works fine for my case, but maybe this is
too general. Is there a chance that a Python module would end in ".exe"?
IIRC, py2exe may create executables
On 05/02/2009 9:54 PM, James Mills wrote:
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Volodymyr Orlenko wrote:
[...] Maybe there's another
way to fix the forking module?
I believe the best way to fix this is to fix the underlying
issue that Mark has pointed out (monkey-patching mp won't do).
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Volodymyr Orlenko wrote:
> In the patch I submitted, I simply check if the name of the supposed module
> ends with ".exe". It works fine for my case, but maybe this is too general.
> Is there a chance that a Python module would end in ".exe"? If so, maybe we
> shoul
On 05/02/2009 8:26 PM, Mark Hammond wrote:
On 6/02/2009 2:50 PM, Mark Hammond wrote:
On 6/02/2009 11:37 AM, Volodya wrote:
Hi all,
I think I've found a small bug with multiprocessing package on
Windows.
I'd actually argue its a bug in pythonservice.exe - it should set
sys.argv[] to resembl
On 6/02/2009 2:50 PM, Mark Hammond wrote:
On 6/02/2009 11:37 AM, Volodya wrote:
Hi all,
I think I've found a small bug with multiprocessing package on
Windows.
I'd actually argue its a bug in pythonservice.exe - it should set
sys.argv[] to resemble a normal python process with argv[0] being t
On 6/02/2009 11:37 AM, Volodya wrote:
Hi all,
I think I've found a small bug with multiprocessing package on
Windows.
I'd actually argue its a bug in pythonservice.exe - it should set
sys.argv[] to resemble a normal python process with argv[0] being the
script. I'll fix it...
Cheers,
Mar
