➜
This issue trackerhas been migrated toGitHub, and is currentlyread-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on2016-11-21 10:19 byxdegaye, last changed2022-04-11 14:58 byadmin. This issue is nowclosed.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| test_posix_flock.patch | xdegaye,2016-11-21 10:19 | review | ||
| test_posix_lockf_2.patch | xdegaye,2016-12-21 21:09 | review | ||
| Pull Requests | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| URL | Status | Linked | Edit |
| PR 552 | closed | dstufft,2017-03-31 16:36 | |
| PR 4488 | merged | xdegaye,2017-11-21 09:05 | |
| Messages (11) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg281344 -(view) | Author: Xavier de Gaye (xdegaye)* | Date: 2016-11-21 10:19 | |
The patch fixes the following error:======================================================================ERROR: test_lockf (test.test_posix.PosixTester)----------------------------------------------------------------------Traceback (most recent call last): File "/sdcard/org.bitbucket.pyona/lib/python3.7/test/test_posix.py", line 195, in test_lockf posix.lockf(fd, posix.F_LOCK, 4)AttributeError: module 'posix' has no attribute 'F_LOCK' | |||
| msg283752 -(view) | Author: (yan12125)* | Date: 2016-12-21 12:36 | |
FYI: Since Android NDK r14 beta1, F_LOCK is defined in unified headers. [1] In $ANDROID_NDK/sysroot/usr/include/bits/lockf.h:#define F_ULOCK 0#define F_LOCK 1#define F_TLOCK 2#define F_TEST 3[1]https://android.googlesource.com/platform/ndk.git/+/master/docs/UnifiedHeaders.md | |||
| msg283758 -(view) | Author: STINNER Victor (vstinner)* | Date: 2016-12-21 14:54 | |
> The patch fixes the following error:Do you mean that the patch adds posix.F_LOCK constant on Android? | |||
| msg283759 -(view) | Author: Xavier de Gaye (xdegaye)* | Date: 2016-12-21 15:12 | |
No, the patch prevents posix.flock() to be defined on Android API 24 with android-ndk-r13. But I plan to change it so that the test is skipped when posix does not have the F_LOCK attribute as this problem is not worth a change in the build machinery. It makes even more sense now that android-ndk-r14 will be released with "Unified Headers". BTW thanks Chi Hsuan Yen for this important information. | |||
| msg283767 -(view) | Author: STINNER Victor (vstinner)* | Date: 2016-12-21 16:28 | |
Oh ok, the issue is more subtle than what I understood.I reviewed test_posix_flock.patch and proposed some changes to the comment/doc. | |||
| msg283781 -(view) | Author: Xavier de Gaye (xdegaye)* | Date: 2016-12-21 20:33 | |
Thanks for the review Victor.I have createdissue 29040: building Android with android-ndk-r14. | |||
| msg283785 -(view) | Author: Xavier de Gaye (xdegaye)* | Date: 2016-12-21 21:09 | |
New patch.Please use autoreconf before running the patch (autoreconf instead of autoconf because the description of HAVE_LOCKF has been updated). | |||
| msg283788 -(view) | Author: STINNER Victor (vstinner)* | Date: 2016-12-21 21:57 | |
The new patch now looks good to me. | |||
| msg283823 -(view) | Author: Roundup Robot (python-dev) | Date: 2016-12-22 09:41 | |
New changeset51b09b10d4f8 by Xavier de Gaye in branch '3.6':Issue#28762: lockf() is available on Android API level 24, but thehttps://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/51b09b10d4f8New changeset146157d91283 by Xavier de Gaye in branch 'default':Issue#28762: Merge 3.6.https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/146157d91283 | |||
| msg306634 -(view) | Author: Xavier de Gaye (xdegaye)* | Date: 2017-11-21 09:06 | |
This change is not needed anymore now that Unified Headers are supported by android-ndk-r14 (seeissue 29040) | |||
| msg306801 -(view) | Author: Xavier de Gaye (xdegaye)* | Date: 2017-11-23 11:01 | |
New changeset5ce1069a6ff0d5443074d33ba1d403ccd2eaf3d3 by xdegaye in branch 'master':bpo-28762: Revert last commit (now using Android Unified Headers) (GH-4488)https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/5ce1069a6ff0d5443074d33ba1d403ccd2eaf3d3 | |||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:58:39 | admin | set | github: 72948 |
| 2017-11-23 11:02:01 | xdegaye | set | status: open -> closed resolution: not a bug -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved |
| 2017-11-23 11:01:43 | xdegaye | set | messages: +msg306801 |
| 2017-11-21 09:07:00 | xdegaye | set | status: closed -> open resolution: fixed -> not a bug messages: +msg306634 stage: resolved -> patch review |
| 2017-11-21 09:05:27 | xdegaye | set | pull_requests: +pull_request4426 |
| 2017-03-31 16:36:07 | dstufft | set | pull_requests: +pull_request829 |
| 2016-12-22 11:28:02 | xdegaye | set | status: open -> closed resolution: fixed stage: patch review -> resolved |
| 2016-12-22 09:41:19 | python-dev | set | nosy: +python-dev messages: +msg283823 |
| 2016-12-21 21:57:17 | vstinner | set | messages: +msg283788 |
| 2016-12-21 21:09:38 | xdegaye | set | files: +test_posix_lockf_2.patch messages: +msg283785 title: configure links with lockf and F_LOCK is not declared in Android API 24 -> lockf() is available now on Android API level 24, but the F_LOCK macro is not defined |
| 2016-12-21 20:33:03 | xdegaye | set | messages: +msg283781 |
| 2016-12-21 16:28:18 | vstinner | set | messages: +msg283767 |
| 2016-12-21 15:12:02 | xdegaye | set | messages: +msg283759 |
| 2016-12-21 14:54:58 | vstinner | set | nosy: +vstinner messages: +msg283758 |
| 2016-12-21 12:36:55 | yan12125 | set | nosy: +yan12125 messages: +msg283752 |
| 2016-11-21 15:40:04 | xdegaye | link | issue26865 dependencies |
| 2016-11-21 10:19:49 | xdegaye | create | |