Message 129904 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	neologix
Recipients	gregory.p.smith, loewis, neologix, pitrou, s7v7nislands, vstinner
Date	2011-03-02.17:01:07
SpamBayes Score	8.759685e-09
Marked as misclassified	No
Message-id	<1299085268.22.0.526916047565.issue11284@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to

Content
Attached is a new version falling back to /proc/self/fd when closefrom(2) is not available (on Unix), working on Linux. It's indeed much faster than the current approach. Note that it's only used if _posixsubprocess is not available, because in that case the FD are closed from _posixsubprocess.c:child_exec. To make it available to _posixsubprocess, I was thinking of putting the closefrom code in a helper function, which would then be called from posix_closefrom and _posixsubprocess. Is this the proper way to do ? If yes, what file would be a good recipient for that ?

Attached is a new version falling back to /proc/self/fd when closefrom(2) is not available (on Unix), working on Linux.
It's indeed much faster than the current approach.
Note that it's only used if _posixsubprocess is not available, because in that case the FD are closed from _posixsubprocess.c:child_exec.
To make it available to _posixsubprocess, I was thinking of putting the closefrom code in a helper function, which would then be called from posix_closefrom and _posixsubprocess.
Is this the proper way to do ?
If yes, what file would be a good recipient for that ?

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2011-03-02 17:01:08	neologix	set	recipients: + neologix, loewis, gregory.p.smith, pitrou, vstinner, s7v7nislands
2011-03-02 17:01:08	neologix	set	messageid: <1299085268.22.0.526916047565.issue11284@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2011-03-02 17:01:07	neologix	link	issue11284 messages
2011-03-02 17:01:07	neologix	create