From 5f6f6eb0bff52841ee18e5c6a96fe3600f44693d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Georg Brandl Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 20:55:37 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Merged revisions 83431 via svnmerge from svn+ssh://svn.python.org/python/branches/py3k ........ r83431 | ronald.oussoren | 2010-08-01 21:18:13 +0200 (So, 01 Aug 2010) | 6 lines test_getgroups as introduced with issue7900 failed on systems where 'id -G' and posix.getgroups() returned the same information, but one of the sources contains duplicate information. Rewrite the check using sets instead of lists. ........ --- Lib/test/test_posix.py | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/Lib/test/test_posix.py b/Lib/test/test_posix.py index a830c369c28..42ad1af7d3b 100644 --- a/Lib/test/test_posix.py +++ b/Lib/test/test_posix.py @@ -281,11 +281,11 @@ class PosixTester(unittest.TestCase): if not groups: raise unittest.SkipTest("need working 'id -G'") - # The order of groups isn't important, hence the calls - # to sorted. + # 'id -G' and 'os.getgroups()' should return the same + # groups, ignoring order and duplicates. self.assertEqual( - list(sorted([int(x) for x in groups.split()])), - list(sorted(posix.getgroups()))) + set([int(x) for x in groups.split()]), + set(posix.getgroups())) class PosixGroupsTester(unittest.TestCase):