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 vstinner
Recipients gregory.p.smith, izbyshev, koobs, nanjekyejoannah, pablogsal, pitrou, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner
Date 2019-01-15.22:50:16
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
Serhiy Storchaka:
> I mean that after writing tests they can be tested manually by disabling conditions for posix_spawn one by one. I.e. some tests should fail if remove "stdout is None" and some tests should fail if remove "not close_fds", etc.

I made some manual tests on my PR 11452. I changed close_fds default value from True to False. I also modified my change to use posix_spawnp using Joannah's PR 11554 of bpo-35674.

The following tests fail *as expected*:

* test_close_fds_when_max_fd_is_lowered
* test_exception_errpipe_normal
* test_exception_errpipe_bad_data

The 2 errpipe tests mock subprocess to inject errors in the error pipe... but posix_spawn() doesn't expose its private "error pipe", so the test is not relevant for posix_spawn().

test_close_fds_when_max_fd_is_lowered() tests close_fds=True behavior. It's expected that it fails.

At least, I didn't notice any bug.
Date User Action Args
2019-01-15 22:50:18vstinnersetrecipients: + vstinner, gregory.p.smith, pitrou, serhiy.storchaka, koobs, izbyshev, pablogsal, nanjekyejoannah
2019-01-15 22:50:16vstinnersetmessageid: <>
2019-01-15 22:50:16vstinnerlinkissue35537 messages
2019-01-15 22:50:16vstinnercreate