➜

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 serhiy.storchaka
Recipients Arfrever, georg.brandl, hynek, larry, r.david.murray, serhiy.storchaka
Date 2012-07-02.15:16:23
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1341242199.3264.192.camel@raxxla>
In-reply-to <1341238212.53.0.779754229418.issue15202@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content 
> So, please make the relevant code changes I proposed on Rietveld (adding "*," everywhere was it iirc) and resubmit and we can get that in.  I'll give you a code-only review of the other patch too--I'll start on that now.

Here is a changed patches.

Personally, I doubt that followlinks-to-follow_symlinks-4.patch is
better than followlinks-to-follow_symlinks-3.patch. Also my concern is
the incompatibility of the arguments of os.walk and os.fwalk.
Files
File name Uploaded
followlinks-to-follow_symlinks-4.patch serhiy.storchaka, 2012-07-02.15:16:21
symlinks-to-follow_symlinks-4.patch serhiy.storchaka, 2012-07-02.15:16:22
History
Date User Action Args
2012-07-02 15:16:29serhiy.storchakasetrecipients: + serhiy.storchaka, georg.brandl, larry, Arfrever, r.david.murray, hynek
2012-07-02 15:16:24serhiy.storchakalinkissue15202 messages
2012-07-02 15:16:23serhiy.storchakacreate