Author jeremy.kloth
Recipients chris.jerdonek, georg.brandl, jeremy.kloth, ncoghlan, pitrou, sbt
Date 2012-08-19.15:26:20
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <CAGvrs3+vHUii9k=JbkZ38idXkU5ZzVQjtNY5bKobSSuHUUi3yQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1345387425.52.0.107525352586.issue15526@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
However #1 is the reason that is bug exists in the first place.  The
designer of the test guessed wrong on the "magic value" for the
timeout.  There will never be a correct timeout value as it varies
from machine to machine and from workload to workload on a given
machine.  For any value that is picked, there exists a scenario where
it will fail.

#2 is certainly a viable work-around and it appears that other tests
(notably the test for fork/exec) do similar so it wouldn't be
unprecedented

#3 is really only useful if other tests need a "wait for process"
helper on Windows.

#4 really just highlights a deficiency with os.startfile() so I'm fine
with deferring that to a feature request for 3.4.

I'll cook up a patch implementing #2 unless anyone else is feeling ambitious.
History
Date User Action Args
2012-08-19 15:26:22jeremy.klothsetrecipients: + jeremy.kloth, georg.brandl, ncoghlan, pitrou, chris.jerdonek, sbt
2012-08-19 15:26:20jeremy.klothlinkissue15526 messages
2012-08-19 15:26:20jeremy.klothcreate