- Python Home
- About
- News
- Documentation
- Downloads
- Community
- Foundation
- Developer's Guide
- Issue Tracker
- Issues
- Summaries
- User
- Administration
- Help
Message157428
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
| Author | pitrou |
|---|---|
| Recipients | asvetlov, brian.curtin, pitrou, tim.golden |
| Date | 2012-04-03.15:05:12 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1333465201.3382.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> |
| In-reply-to | <1333463926.18.0.62076489311.issue14484@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> As for the second point, why else are you calling os.kill if you don't > want to kill the given process? I don't disagree that it's on the > perverse side, but that's the functionality available. Perhaps we > should *not* have the fallback and only operate on the signals? I just meant that exiting with 0 isn't exactly expected when a process is forcibly killed (0 meaning success, as far as I know). |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2012-04-03 15:05:13 | pitrou | set | recipients: + pitrou, tim.golden, brian.curtin, asvetlov |
| 2012-04-03 15:05:12 | pitrou | link | issue14484 messages |
| 2012-04-03 15:05:12 | pitrou | create | |

