Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

new selectors module should support devpoll on Solaris #63131

Closed
giampaolo opened this issue Sep 5, 2013 · 19 comments
Closed

new selectors module should support devpoll on Solaris #63131

giampaolo opened this issue Sep 5, 2013 · 19 comments
Assignees
Labels
stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir

Comments

@giampaolo
Copy link
Contributor

giampaolo commented Sep 5, 2013

BPO 18931
Nosy @gvanrossum, @jcea, @pitrou, @vstinner, @giampaolo, @tiran, @meadori, @felipecruz, @1st1
Files
  • devpoll.patch
  • devpoll2.patch
  • devpoll3.patch
  • devpoll3_try_again.diff
  • Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.

    Show more details

    GitHub fields:

    assignee = 'https://github.com/giampaolo'
    closed_at = <Date 2014-03-20.20:55:40.696>
    created_at = <Date 2013-09-05.10:58:35.550>
    labels = ['library']
    title = 'new selectors module should support devpoll on Solaris'
    updated_at = <Date 2014-03-20.20:57:23.713>
    user = 'https://github.com/giampaolo'

    bugs.python.org fields:

    activity = <Date 2014-03-20.20:57:23.713>
    actor = 'giampaolo.rodola'
    assignee = 'giampaolo.rodola'
    closed = True
    closed_date = <Date 2014-03-20.20:55:40.696>
    closer = 'giampaolo.rodola'
    components = ['Library (Lib)']
    creation = <Date 2013-09-05.10:58:35.550>
    creator = 'giampaolo.rodola'
    dependencies = []
    files = ['31618', '34494', '34522', '34535']
    hgrepos = []
    issue_num = 18931
    keywords = ['patch']
    message_count = 19.0
    messages = ['196989', '197015', '200756', '202118', '213886', '213898', '213900', '213901', '213909', '214008', '214016', '214023', '214027', '214118', '214137', '214207', '214275', '214280', '214282']
    nosy_count = 13.0
    nosy_names = ['gvanrossum', 'jcea', 'pitrou', 'vstinner', 'giampaolo.rodola', 'christian.heimes', 'meador.inge', 'neologix', 'rosslagerwall', 'python-dev', 'sbt', 'felipecruz', 'yselivanov']
    pr_nums = []
    priority = 'normal'
    resolution = 'fixed'
    stage = None
    status = 'closed'
    superseder = None
    type = None
    url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue18931'
    versions = ['Python 3.5']

    @giampaolo
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    giampaolo commented Sep 5, 2013

    This is a follow up of bpo-16853.
    I will try to see whether I can come up with a patch later today.

    @giampaolo
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    giampaolo commented Sep 5, 2013

    Patch is in attachment.

    @neologix
    Copy link
    Mannequin

    neologix mannequin commented Oct 21, 2013

    Just to let you know that I'm not forgetting this issue.
    I'd just like to iron-out issue bpo-19172 (keys()-like method for selectors), since it could impact the API, to avoid repeated refactoring.

    @vstinner
    Copy link
    Member

    vstinner commented Nov 4, 2013

    @giampaolo: Your patch doesn't apply cleanly anymore. Could you update it?

    Issue bpo-19172 has been fixed, selectors now have a get_map() method.

    @jcea
    Copy link
    Member

    jcea commented Mar 17, 2014

    We missed 3.4 :-(.

    Targeting Python 3.5 now. Giampaolo, could you possibly refresh your patch?. Thanks.

    @giampaolo
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    giampaolo commented Mar 17, 2014

    Sorry for not being able to rewrite the patch in time for 3.4.
    I will provide an updated patch (I need to setup an Open Solaris box first though).
    The code for poll(), epoll() and /dev/poll will have many similarities, so I think it makes sense to refactor it and use a base class to avoid code duplication, similarly to what I did in my original patch.

    @gvanrossum
    Copy link
    Member

    gvanrossum commented Mar 17, 2014

    I actually prefer some code duplication in this case. Makes the review
    easier.
    On Mar 17, 2014 2:17 PM, "Giampaolo Rodola'" <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:

    Giampaolo Rodola' added the comment:

    Sorry for not being able to rewrite the patch in time for 3.4.
    I will provide an updated patch (I need to setup an Open Solaris box first
    though).
    The code for poll(), epoll() and /dev/poll will have many similarities, so
    I think it makes sense to refactor it and use a base class to avoid code
    duplication, similarly to what I did in my original patch.

    ----------


    Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
    <http://bugs.python.org/issue18931\>


    @giampaolo
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    giampaolo commented Mar 17, 2014

    OK, I will provide a patch soon.

    @jcea
    Copy link
    Member

    jcea commented Mar 17, 2014

    BDFL talked :-).

    I can test the patch on a Solaris box, and Python has OpenSolaris buildbots.

    @giampaolo
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    giampaolo commented Mar 18, 2014

    Patch in attachment.

    @neologix
    Copy link
    Mannequin

    neologix mannequin commented Mar 18, 2014

    Could you regenerate it without --git (it doesn't show under the review
    tool)?

    @1st1
    Copy link
    Member

    1st1 commented Mar 18, 2014

    Why there is no 'review' link for the new patch?

    @gvanrossum
    Copy link
    Member

    gvanrossum commented Mar 18, 2014

    review links are only generated for patches that apply cleanly (I don't
    know to which branch)

    On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Yury Selivanov <report@bugs.python.org>wrote:

    Yury Selivanov added the comment:

    Why there is no 'review' link for the new patch?

    ----------


    Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
    <http://bugs.python.org/issue18931\>


    @giampaolo
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    giampaolo commented Mar 19, 2014

    Regenerated without --git.

    @1st1
    Copy link
    Member

    1st1 commented Mar 19, 2014

    Still no review link. Somehow you managed to upload the first patch correctly. Does the new one apply cleanly on the default branch?

    @giampaolo
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    giampaolo commented Mar 20, 2014

    "hg import http://bugs.python.org/file34522/devpoll3.patch" applies cleanly for me. Not sure what else to do.

    @gvanrossum
    Copy link
    Member

    gvanrossum commented Mar 20, 2014

    LGTM, but I don't have a Solaris box to test. I suppose one of you has tested this? Then okay to commit to the default (== 3.5) branch.

    @python-dev
    Copy link
    Mannequin

    python-dev mannequin commented Mar 20, 2014

    New changeset 0a51a516bc70 by Giampaolo Rodola' in branch 'default':
    Fix bpo-18931: selectors module now supports /dev/poll on Solaris.
    http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/0a51a516bc70

    @giampaolo giampaolo added the stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir label Mar 20, 2014
    @giampaolo giampaolo self-assigned this Mar 20, 2014
    @giampaolo
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    giampaolo commented Mar 20, 2014

    I successfully tested this on Solaris 11.

    @ezio-melotti ezio-melotti transferred this issue from another repository Apr 10, 2022
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
    Labels
    stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir
    Projects
    None yet
    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    5 participants