Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #103349 > unrolled thread

Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2016-02-22 10:11 -0800
    Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> - 2016-02-22 18:17 +0000
      Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 05:25 +1100
        Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> - 2016-02-22 18:39 +0000
          Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-02-22 20:48 +0200
            Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-02-23 10:37 +1100
              Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> - 2016-02-23 00:08 +0000
                Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 11:18 +1100
                  Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> - 2016-02-23 00:26 +0000
                    Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 11:33 +1100
                      Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> - 2016-02-23 00:44 +0000
                        Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 11:56 +1100
          Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 06:04 +1100
            Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-22 11:22 -0800
              Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-02-23 10:45 +1100
            Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> - 2016-02-22 19:22 +0000
              Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-02-22 21:32 +0200
                Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-02-22 14:41 -0500
                  Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-02-22 22:41 +0200
                    Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-22 13:05 -0800
                      Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-02-22 23:22 +0200
                        Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-22 15:26 -0800
                Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-02-23 11:33 +1100
                  Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-02-23 08:54 +0200
                    Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-22 23:18 -0800
                      Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-02-23 21:04 +0200
                    Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-02-24 12:40 +1100
                      Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-02-24 09:20 +0200
                        Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2016-02-25 16:38 +1100
                          Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-02-25 08:54 +0200
                            Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2016-02-25 19:21 +1100
                          Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> - 2016-02-25 10:05 +0000
              Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 06:37 +1100
              Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-02-23 11:03 +1100
                Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> - 2016-02-23 00:11 +0000
                Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-22 18:27 -0800
                  Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 13:53 +1100
                    Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-22 19:26 -0800
                  Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-23 08:09 +0000
                    Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-23 00:22 -0800
                      Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2016-02-23 09:40 +0100
                      Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-23 09:00 +0000
                        Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-23 15:14 +0000
                      Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-02-25 11:41 +1100
                      Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-02-25 10:03 -0500
      Re: Make a unique filesystem path, without creating the file Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-02-23 11:18 +1100

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#103398

Paul Rubin wrote:

> Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2015-September/036333.html
>> then http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/python/dev/1223780
> 
> Thanks.  It would be nice if those were gatewayed to usenet like this
> group is.  I can't bring myself to subscribe to mailing lists.

They are available via news.gmane.org as

gmane.comp.python.devel
gmane.comp.python.ideas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103399

On 23/02/2016 08:22, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2015-September/036333.html
>> then http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/python/dev/1223780
>
> Thanks.  It would be nice if those were gatewayed to usenet like this
> group is.  I can't bring myself to subscribe to mailing lists.

Piece of cake using even a semi-decent email client (I use Thunderbird 
on Windows) via gmane.  It provides access to hundreds of Python mailing 
lists, blogs and even updates to the Activestate recipes :)

>
>>> There are a few other choices in the PEP whose benefit is unclear to me,
>>> but they aren't harmful, and I guess the decisions have already been
>>> made.
>> The PEP status is draft so is subject to change.
>
> Well they might be changeable but it sounds like there's a level of
> consensus by now, that wouldn't be helped by more bikeshedding over
> relatively minor stuff.  I might write up some further comments and post
> them here
>

You might as well, can't do any harm and somebody might pick up on 
something.

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103403

On 2016-02-23, Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 23/02/2016 08:22, Paul Rubin wrote:
>> Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>>> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2015-September/036333.html
>>> then http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/python/dev/1223780
>>
>> Thanks.  It would be nice if those were gatewayed to usenet like
>> this group is. I can't bring myself to subscribe to mailing lists.
>
> Piece of cake using even a semi-decent email client (I use Thunderbird 
> on Windows) via gmane.

And gmane is even better using a decent news (NNTP) client.  I prefer
slrn, but that may be a bit old-school for many.  Technically, gmane's
news server is not "Usenet", but the UI is the same.

Gmane's internal search facility is a bit lame, but searching gmane
with Google works fairly well.

> It provides access to hundreds of Python mailing lists, blogs and
> even updates to the Activestate recipes :)

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! World War Three can
                                  at               be averted by adherence
                              gmail.com            to a strictly enforced
                                                   dress code!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103469

On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 07:22 pm, Paul Rubin wrote:

> Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2015-September/036333.html
>> then http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/python/dev/1223780
> 
> Thanks.  It would be nice if those were gatewayed to usenet like this
> group is.  I can't bring myself to subscribe to mailing lists.
> 
>>> There are a few other choices in the PEP whose benefit is unclear to me,
>>> but they aren't harmful, and I guess the decisions have already been
>>> made.
>> The PEP status is draft so is subject to change.
> 
> Well they might be changeable but it sounds like there's a level of
> consensus by now, that wouldn't be helped by more bikeshedding over
> relatively minor stuff.  I might write up some further comments and post
> them here

If you're going to do so, please do so in the next few days (or write to me
off list to ask for an extension) because I intend to ask Guido for a
ruling early next week.


-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103499

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016, at 03:22, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Thanks.  It would be nice if those were gatewayed to usenet like this
> group is.  I can't bring myself to subscribe to mailing lists.

Have you tried gmane?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103378

On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 05:17 am, Jon Ribbens wrote:

> On 2016-02-22, Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
>> On 02/14/2016 04:08 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
>>> I am unconcerned with whether there is a real filesystem entry of that
>>> name; the goal entails having no filesystem activity for this. I want a
>>> valid unique filesystem path, without touching the filesystem.
>>
>> This is impossible.  If you don't touch the file system you have no way
>> to know if the path is unique.
> 
> Weeeeeell, I have a lot of sympathy for that point, but on the other
> hand the whole concept of UUIDs ("import uuid") is predicated on the
> opposite assumption.

You're referring to uuid4, presumably, as the other varieties of UUID use
non-secret information, such as the time, or a namespace, either of which
is potentially public knowledge. 

Only uuid4 is considered "globally unique", and that's not *certainly*
globally unique, only that the chances of an *accidental* collision is
below some threshold deemed "small enough that we don't care".

Deliberate collisions of public UUIDs are *trivial*. Pick a UUID you know is
already in use, and use it again.

There's a lot of assumptions involved in the "globally unique" claim, and
there are probably ways to contrive to generate the same UUIDs as someone
else. But to what benefit? UUIDs are not intended as security tokens, and
are not hardened against attack. Even uuid4 may not be suitable for
security, since it may use a cryptographically weak PRNG such as Mersenne
Twister.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web