Message153661
The second instance is inside the source code string that's written out as the script to be run in the subprocess. Not a bad idea actually:
- it avoids writing the example args twice (which is what I was thinking of doing)
- it avoids turning the test_script into a string formatting template (which is something I've been trying to avoid for that test)
- it provides an additional sanity check on how sys.path is being initialised in the subprocess
For the two failures, I suggest modifying _check_script() to return the "rc, out, err" from the underlying assert_python_ok() call, then updating the two offending tests to call _check_script() appropriately instead of calling assert_python_ok() directly. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2012-02-19 00:16:05 | ncoghlan | set | recipients:
+ ncoghlan, eric.araujo, Jason.Yeo |
2012-02-19 00:16:05 | ncoghlan | set | messageid: <1329610565.71.0.112690538513.issue14026@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2012-02-19 00:16:05 | ncoghlan | link | issue14026 messages |
2012-02-19 00:16:04 | ncoghlan | create | |
|