[Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits? (original) (raw)
Robert Collins robertc at robertcollins.net
Thu Jun 16 03:26:14 EDT 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 16 Jun 2016 6:55 PM, "Larry Hastings" <larry at hastings.org> wrote:
Why do you call it only "semi-fixed"? As far as I understand it, the semantics of os.urandom() in 3.5.2rc1 are indistinguishable from reading from /dev/urandom directly, except it may not need to use a file handle.
Which is a contract change. Someone testing in E.g. a chroot could have a different device on /dev/urandom, and now they will need to intercept syscalls for the same effect. Personally I think this is fine, but assuming i see Barry's point correctly, it is indeed but the same as it was.
-rob -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20160616/d4baebb4/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]