-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 86
(#196) fix: Use IANA-recommended port range and add retry on RuntimeError #246
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
Open
unclepomedev
wants to merge
1
commit into
JacquesLucke:master
Choose a base branch
from
unclepomedev:change_port_and_retry
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+2
−2
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
why the RuntimeError error in this PR?
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.
@Mateusz-Grzelinski
According to the traceback in the linked issue, a RuntimeError is raised when the specific port is unavailable, so I've updated the code to catch it.
However, I am concerned that RuntimeError is too generic. Catching it might trigger the retry loop for errors unrelated to the port issue. To mitigate this, I suggest adding a maximum retry limit. What do you think?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Debugpy itself can produce number of errors
and also anything that
socket.bindcan throw: PermissionError, OSError. There might be alsosubprocessmodule involved...I think the original author wanted to catch ONLY the error for repeated use of port. Like this one:
In summary:
I think the intent was:
But to be honest this will never work because debugpy uses
subprocess.Opento listen (WTF?!) and then re-raise the erros in degraded way...so good luck handling that correctly?
So a semi working and very delicate snippen for WINDOWS only would be something like this.
Still requires more work for linux and macos...
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
@Mateusz-Grzelinski
Thank you for the detailed explanation! I have just started looking at this code, so I don't have an idea for a fundamental solution yet (since the issue was tagged as a "good first issue", I assume a deep architectural fix isn't expected here).
I can propose the following two approaches. Which would you prefer?