Message195888
| Author | neologix |
|---|---|
| Recipients | barry, benjamin.peterson, christian.heimes, georg.brandl, neologix, pitrou, python-dev, sbt, vajrasky, vstinner |
| Date | 2013-08-22.13:27:53 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <CAH_1eM1j6bsnMrEnhgYAYxnz_C9a2u5=U7CV+=tUuv2oDhHMUQ@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-reply-to | <CAMpsgwZZ+MJC+n7fZJKDp_5ZEMzSruODR1s4pntgHRY22Mb4RA@mail.gmail.com> |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> STINNER Victor added the comment: > > PySSL_RAND_atfork_parent() still uses getpid(). This number is not > very random in the *parent* process :-) :-) IMO this patch has been rushed in and should be reverted for now. It's still not async-signal safe, had typos, plus this problem noted by Victor. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2013-08-22 13:27:53 | neologix | set | recipients: + neologix, barry, georg.brandl, pitrou, vstinner, christian.heimes, benjamin.peterson, python-dev, sbt, vajrasky |
| 2013-08-22 13:27:53 | neologix | link | issue18747 messages |
| 2013-08-22 13:27:53 | neologix | create | |