Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Python's shutil.copy2 fails on Android #2016
Python's shutil.copy2 fails on Android when copying a file's meta data (perm bits, access times) onto certain filesystems (presumably FAT). This is documented as python issue28141
These commits workaround that bug by
Thanks, I'll attend to those.
I appreciate the output of flake8, I need to run that manually. I use emacs
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Kevin Yap email@example.com wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, the block that uses
generators.py can be replaced by
pelican.utils.copy. With that, you don't need the extra function since you can just put the
try/except in there.
Not exactly the scope of this PR, but it makes sense in terms of organizing/clean-up.
@avaris I see what you're saying, the new little worker, copy_file_metadata is actually used twice within utils's copy, so maybe it makes more sense to keep that utility then duplicate the try/except.
Hey, can you explain what
Edit: Also, just being used twice doesn't require a separate function, IMO. Maybe you can make it a local function like it was with
Hi @justinmayer, I see the label "awaiting user feedback" was added to this pull request, but I guess I do not know who "the user" is. Are you waiting on me?
If so, are you waiting on me to comment on @avaris' comment?
I did move the function copy_file_metadata up to below the copy function. I did not remove walk_error, though I am happy to do so, as it is extraneous to what this change request requires.
This places two commits into this pull request. The first are my changes, the next is presumably the recent changes to getpelican/pelican master.
I am not sure if I needed to update my branch at all, or if I did it the right way. What do you think?
Yes, I was awaiting your response to the latest comments from @avaris. Now that you have made some follow-up changes, there are two things left to do:
First, as you can see by the indicator at the bottom of this pull request, there is a failing check. In this case, it is compliance with PEP 8 that needs to be addressed (see test output). You can run