-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34k
bpo-45234: Fix FileNotFound exception raised instead of IsADirectoryError in shutil.copyfile() #28421
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
Merged
ambv
merged 4 commits into
python:main
from
akulakov:45234-Fix-copyfile-filenotfound-error
Sep 21, 2021
Merged
bpo-45234: Fix FileNotFound exception raised instead of IsADirectoryError in shutil.copyfile() #28421
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions
3
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Library/2021-09-17-11-20-55.bpo-45234.qUcTVt.rst
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ | ||
| Fixed a regression in :func:`~shutil.copyfile`, :func:`~shutil.copy`, | ||
| :func:`~shutil.copy2` raising :exc:`FileNotFoundError` when source is a | ||
| directory, which should raise :exc:`IsADirectoryError` |
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Shouldn't this just test
copyfile()?Note that for Windows there's been some discussion about changing
copy2(), and maybecopy(), to call the systemCopyFileExW()function, which also copies alternate data streams, extended attributes, and security resource attributes. In that case the high-level copy functions will no longer usecopyfile(),copymode(), andcopystat()in Windows.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's worth testing copy and copy2 for consistency of handling a dir arg, because they already do some dir-related logic (for dst arg), but this may be done here or in separate tests. Looking at other tests, to follow the same naming pattern, we can do
test_copy_dirs()andtest_copy2_dirs().But it makes sense to do this testing in the same function for all three because we're ensuring consistency and also it's convenient because the set up of dirs and expected errors is the same.
I can remove these lines though if you think it's not worth testing them here at this point in view of the other work you mentioned.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Currently what
copy()andcopy2()do that's related tosrcbeing a directory is implemented incopyfile(), so only the latter really needs to be tested. I see the point about checking consistency, but would separate tests maybe be more obvious for someone who's modifyingcopy()orcopy2()?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sounds good, I will extract them into separate tests a bit later today.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've updated the tests and they're passing, please take a look..