RetroSearch Browse

Mon Dec 22 17:10:58 EST 2003 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-December/041389.html

On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 08:03:17AM -0600, Jeff Epler wrote:
> Well, unlike the last two bugs I filed in redhat bugzilla, this one has
> already seen some activity.  I hope they don't take the line that this
> is not a bug :(

Unfortunately, this is redhat's position.

------- Additional Comments From roland at redhat.com  2003-12-22 16:37 -------
I think it is clear that the specification refers to the elements of
the child process state that survive exec, so that the executed
command can perceive them as part of its "environment".  You could
submit an interpretation request, but I think the committee would
concur with my reading.  The specification of pthread_atfork refers to
calls to fork, not to other parts of the POSIX.1 implementation.  If
your application calls system, and not fork, those clauses do not
apply to it.

roland at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|                            |NOTABUG
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-December/041389.html below:

[Python-Dev] Python threads end up blocking signals in subprocesses