Re: Multiprocessing bug, is information ever omitted from a traceback?

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path	<python-python-list@m.gmane.org>
X-Original-To	python-list@python.org
Delivered-To	python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status	OK 0.000
X-Spam-Evidence	'H': 1.00; 'S': 0.00; 'bug': 0.02; 'subject:bug': 0.04; 'fixes': 0.05; 'received:verizon.net': 0.07; 'suite.': 0.07; 'terry': 0.07; 'problem:': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229.12': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'received:lo.gmane.org': 0.09; 'release.': 0.09; 'fixed.': 0.15; '2.7.2': 0.16; 'exposes': 0.16; 'reedy': 0.16; 'released.': 0.16; 'subject:ever': 0.16; 'examples': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'jan': 0.19; 'subject:information': 0.21; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'tests.': 0.23; 'code': 0.25; 'fix': 0.27; 'bugs': 0.28; 'version,': 0.28; 'weird': 0.29; 'fixed': 0.29; 'problem': 0.29; 'second': 0.29; 'pm,': 0.29; 'chris': 0.30; 'least': 0.30; 'usually': 0.31; 'subject:?': 0.31; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.33; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.33; 'there': 0.33; 'to:addr:python- list': 0.34; 'test': 0.35; 'minimal': 0.37; 'but': 0.37; "there's": 0.37; 'enough': 0.38; 'received:org': 0.38; 'couple': 0.38; 'subject:from': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'show': 0.67; 'dealing': 0.69; 'exhibiting': 0.73; 'hundred': 0.74; 'hole': 0.84
X-Injected-Via-Gmane	http://gmane.org/
To	python-list@python.org
From	Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu>
Subject	Re: Multiprocessing bug, is information ever omitted from a traceback?
Date	Sat, 10 Dec 2011 18:57:00 -0500
References	<3d377e6e-3da3-4e94-9e3f-999557488211@c16g2000pre.googlegroups.com> <mailman.3489.1323493234.27778.python-list@python.org> <41081049-1047-41ca-b7c1-5e5c3c00e94b@f33g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <4EE3A726.6010201@gmail.com> <CAPTjJmo1KbE72sxvaPikb3B770kQJUDQU-16hUGNs6WEi1Zu9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host	pool-74-109-121-73.phlapa.fios.verizon.net
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
In-Reply-To	<CAPTjJmo1KbE72sxvaPikb3B770kQJUDQU-16hUGNs6WEi1Zu9Q@mail.gmail.com>
X-BeenThere	python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version	2.1.12
Precedence	list
List-Id	General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe	<http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive	<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list>
List-Post	<mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help	<mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe	<http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.3502.1323561450.27778.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines	21
NNTP-Posting-Host	2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace	1323561450 news.xs4all.nl 6937 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:42272
X-Complaints-To	abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:16971

Show key headers only | View raw

On 12/10/2011 2:02 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:

> There's a few differences between 2.6 and 2.7; not usually enough to
> be concerned about in daily use, but when dealing with weird issues,
> it helps to have the latest release.

There are 2 issues. First, 2.7.2 has perhaps a couple hundred bug fixes 
since 2.7.0/2.6.6 were released. So it is possible that this particular 
problem was fixed, or at least changed. Second (leaving security issues 
aside), a Py2 bug fix will only be applied to the post-2.7.2 tip and 
only after the bug has been demonstrated to exist in the post-2.7.2 tip.

About the request for minimal code exhibiting the problem: each bug 
exposes a hole in the test suite. We try to add a new test case with 
each bug fix so fixed bugs stay fixed. So code examples not only show 
that the bug is in the latest version, but also serve as the basis for 
new tests.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Multiprocessing bug, is information ever omitted from a traceback? John Ladasky <ladasky@my-deja.com> - 2011-12-09 15:14 -0800
  Re: Multiprocessing bug, is information ever omitted from a traceback? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-12-10 00:00 -0500
    Re: Multiprocessing bug, is information ever omitted from a traceback? John Ladasky <ladasky@my-deja.com> - 2011-12-10 09:53 -0800
      Re: Multiprocessing bug, is information ever omitted from a traceback? Andrew Berg <bahamutzero8825@gmail.com> - 2011-12-10 12:38 -0600
        Re: Multiprocessing bug, is information ever omitted from a traceback? John Ladasky <ladasky@my-deja.com> - 2011-12-10 11:02 -0800
      Re: Multiprocessing bug, is information ever omitted from a traceback? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-12-11 06:02 +1100
      Re: Multiprocessing bug, is information ever omitted from a traceback? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-12-10 18:57 -0500

csiph-web