GeezerVison

FWIW, I know very little about this module or how the tests are usually done. That said, it looks like all the other uses of is_wasi in this file relate to skipping the whole test, rather than a part of it. Personally, I have no relevant opinion on if your change is okay. 😄 (My irrelevant opinion is that, generally, the behavior of a test should not change based on some environmental condition.)

(Also, FYI, I pointed out the failing buildbot earlier because the first failure happened when a change of mine was merged. That's when I noticed it was probably the pathlib change. Otherwise I don't have any particular interest and probably would not have noticed. 😄)

I agree with Eric -- if it's just a specific part of this test that fails on WASI, best to separate it out into a separate test method that's decorated with @skipIf(is_wasi, "WASI has no user accounts")

I agree in principle, but this style of tweaking test behaviour slightly based on what the system supports is pervasive throughout test_pathlib.py. For example, a few lines below we have:

        if os_helper.can_symlink():
            self.assertEqual(42, (p / 'linkA').readlink().session_id)

Is there something to be said for using a consistent approach, even if it's imperfect?

(I don't feel strongly about this, just thought I'd point it out!)

Hmm. I don't like it, and I'd love to see a PR cleaning all those up ;)

But I guess consistency wins the day for now!