[ python-Bugs-852281 ] test_winreg failing, Win98SE

SourceForge.net noreply at sourceforge.net
Wed Dec 3 10:27:49 EST 2003


Bugs item #852281, was opened at 2003-12-01 15:01
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gvanrossum
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=852281&group_id=5470

Category: Windows
Group: Python 2.4
Status: Open
Resolution: None
>Priority: 5
Submitted By: Tim Peters (tim_one)
>Assigned to: Tim Peters (tim_one)
Summary: test_winreg failing, Win98SE

Initial Comment:
Under current CVS, on Win98SE:

C:\Code\python\PCbuild>python ../lib/test/test_winreg.p
y
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "../lib/test/test_winreg.py", line 135, in ?
    TestAll(HKEY_CURRENT_USER)
  File "../lib/test/test_winreg.py", line 130, in TestAll
    WriteTestData(root_key)
  File "../lib/test/test_winreg.py", line 37, in 
WriteTestData
    SetValueEx(sub_key, value_name, 0, value_type, 
value_data)
WindowsError: [Errno 87] The parameter is incorrect

C:\Code\python\PCbuild>

That's all I know now.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2003-12-03 10:27

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=6380

Fixed in CVS, for 2.4 and 2.3.  Let's hope this is it. (Tim,
please confirm.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2003-12-03 10:21

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=6380

Sigh.  Somehow my SF email forwarding was set to
guido at zope.com. I've fixed it now... But who know how many
other reminders of SF items I've missed... (I wonder if this
was recently changed??? I sure remember getting at least
some SF mail recently, and I definitely get SF mail from the
IDLEfork tracker; I've only got one SF account.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2003-12-03 10:16

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=6380

Sigh. I'll adjust the test to use 2**14-1 and 2**14,
respectively. But that no longer tests for the segfault I
was experiencing before... :-(

BTW, if I seem tardy responding to this, it's because I just
discovered that SF doesn't send me email when this item
changes (maybe it doesn't send me mail at all, I haven't
seen any SF mail in ages I think).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Tim Peters (tim_one)
Date: 2003-12-01 19:34

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=31435

Anthony, yes, it is.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Anthony Baxter (anthonybaxter)
Date: 2003-12-01 19:23

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=29957

Argh. Is this busted on the 2.3 branch as well?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Tim Peters (tim_one)
Date: 2003-12-01 15:28

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=31435

Yes, when I reduced the size of Big String to 12, it stopped 
failing there and failed on Big Binary instead.  The docs don't 
promise that anything larger than 2048 will work ...

"x"*(2**14-1) works, "x"*2**14 does not, for Big String.

"x"*2**14 works, "x"*(2**14+1) does not, for Big Binary.

So 2**14 bytes is the max on my Win98SE, when counting 
the trailing zero byte in REG_SZ.

The limits are not documented (apart from the docs saying 
you shouldn't use any value exceeding 2**11 bytes).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2003-12-01 15:14

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=6380

I bet the Big String and/or Big Binary test values that I
added to the test_data table are too long for Win98. I can
only test this on Win98. Can you experiment and find out
what the largest value is that works on Win98? (The
alternative would be to write code that somehow tries to
*detect* the longest string that works, using bisection. I
don't know if these limits are documented somewhere.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=852281&group_id=5470



More information about the Python-bugs-list mailing list