-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 82
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Use shlex's posix=False for Windows compatibility #84
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #84 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 70.52% 70.52%
=======================================
Files 9 9
Lines 587 587
Branches 75 75
=======================================
Hits 414 414
Misses 149 149
Partials 24 24
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
With this patch, my reproduction in #83 now runs:
|
I'm not sure what codecov is complaining about. That the patch isn't tested? But that function wasn't tested before either. |
My solution is bad! https://stackoverflow.com/a/35900070
https://bugs.python.org/issue1724822 - last updated, 2011 :*( |
Bad solution. I'm doing what I suggested in #83 instead. |
Fixes #83.
I'm a little bit worried this will cause problems on Unix. I tried it quickly and it didn't break my examples.
Maybe
utils.run_shell_command()
should be dropped in favour of callingsubprocess.Popen()
directly. It's a lot safer that way; less worries about quoting issues turning into exploits.