Author pitrou
Recipients alex, christian.heimes, dstufft, hynek, jcea, neologix, pitrou, tarek, vstinner
Date 2013-08-16.17:32:27
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1376674336.2510.6.camel@fsol>
In-reply-to <CAH_1eM313AZs-o=Xm6J_mxo1MRqEdo7iA8N2FWXkv0Zuzg4QfA@mail.gmail.com>
Content
> Why didn't you include ENODEV?
> Apparently it can be reported in some corner cases, e.g. in this patch:
> http://lfs-matrix.net/patches/downloads/linux/linux-2.6.14.2-pseudo_random-1.patch

That isn't mentioned in the POSIX open() spec:
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/open.html

However ENODEV still seems to be a standard errno constant, so why not:
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/errno.h.html

> Otherwise, wouldn't self.addCleanup be simpler than the large
> try/finally block in the test (but it's not available on 2.7)?

The problem is if some code tries to create a fd before the cleanup
callback is called. With a try/finally block we're guaranteed not to
have such a problem.
History
Date User Action Args
2013-08-16 17:32:28pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, jcea, vstinner, christian.heimes, tarek, alex, neologix, hynek, dstufft
2013-08-16 17:32:28pitroulinkissue18756 messages
2013-08-16 17:32:27pitroucreate