I am trying to create a program to easily handle IT requests, and I have created a program to test if a PC on my network is active from a list.
To do this, I wrote the following code:
self.btn_Ping.clicked.connect(self.ping)
def ping(self):
hostname = self.listWidget.currentItem().text()
if hostname:
os.system("ping " + hostname + " -t")
When I run it my main program freezes and I can't do anything until I close the ping command window. What can I do about this? Is there any other command I can use to try to ping a machine without making my main program freeze?
The docs state that os.system() returns the value returned by the command you called, therefore blocking your program until it exits.
They also state that you should use the subprocess module instead.
From ping documentation:
ping /?
Options:
-t Ping the specified host until stopped.
To see statistics and continue - type Control-Break;
To stop - type Control-C.
So, by using -t you are waiting until that machine has stopped, and in case that machine is not stopping, your Python script will run forever.
As mentioned by HyperTrashPanda, use another parameter for launching ping, so that it stops after one or some attempts.
As mentioned in Tim Pietzcker's answer, the use of subprocess is highly recommended over os.system (and others).
To separate the new process from your script, use subprocess.Popen. You should get the output printed normally into sys.stdout. If you want something more complex (e.g. for only printing something if something changes), you can set the stdout (and stderr and stdin) arguments:
Valid values are PIPE, DEVNULL, an existing file descriptor (a positive integer), an existing file object, and None. PIPE indicates that a new pipe to the child should be created. DEVNULL indicates that the special file os.devnull will be used. With the default settings of None, no redirection will occur; the child’s file handles will be inherited from the parent.
-- docs on subproces.Popen, if you scroll down
If you want to get the exit code, use myPopenProcess.poll().
Related
I have a program called my_program that operates a system. the program runs on Linux, and I'm trying to automate it using Python.
my_program is constantly generating output and is suppose to receive input and respond to it.
When I'm running my_program in bash it does work like it should, I receive a constant output from the program and when I press a certain sequence (for instance /3 to change the mode of the system), the program responds with an output.
to start the process I am using:
self.process = Popen(my_program,stdin=PIPE,stdout=PIPE,text=True)
And in order to write input to the system I am using:
self.process.stdin.write('/3')
But the writing does not seem to work, I also tried using:
self.process.communicate('/3)
But since my system constantly generating output, it deadlooks the process and the whole program gets stuck.
Any solution for writing to a process that is constantly generating output?
Edit:
I don't think I can provide a code that can reproduce the problem because I'm using a unique SW that my company has, but it goes somthing like this:
self.process = Popen(my_program,stdin=PIPE,stdout=PIPE,text=True)
self.process.stdin.write('/3')
# try to find a specific string that indicated that the input string was received
string_received = False
while(string_received = False):
response = self.process.stdout.readline().strip()
if (response == expected_string):
break
The operating system implements buffered I/O between processes unless you specifically request otherwise.
In very brief, the output buffer will be flushed and written when it fills up, or (with default options) when you write a newline.
You can disable buffering when you create the Popen object:
self.process = Popen(my_program, stdin=PIPE, stdout=PIPE, text=True, bufsize=1)
... or you can explicitly flush() the file handle when you want to force writing.
self.process.stdin.flush()
However, as the documentation warns you, if you can't predict when the subprocess can read and when it can write, you can easily end up in deadlock. A more maintainable solution might be to run the subprocess via pexpect or similar.
I am running spyder on windows 10 and when I attempt to run a command similar to the following:
cmd = 'python /path/to/program.py arg1 arg2'
subprocess.run(cmd,shell=True)
The script is being run as expected but I would like to see what is being printed to screen by the executed command in the spyder ipython console. I know the program is printing things to screen as expected by other methods (running the program from a shell) so there is not an error in the script I am running.
How do I go about enabling printing for the subprocess?
The output comes in a stream called stdout. To capture it, you need to redirect it to a pipe, which then is terminated in the calling process. subprocess.run(...) has builtin support for handling this:
import subprocess
cmd = 'python /path/to/program.py arg1 arg2'.split()
proc = subprocess.run(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, universal_newlines=True)
print(proc.stdout)
As can be seen, the output is caught in the CompletedProcess object (proc) and then accessed as member data.Also, to make the output into text (a string) rather than a bytearray, I have passed the parameter universal_newlines=True.
A caveat, though, is that subprocess.run(...) runs to completion before it returns control. Therefore, this does not allow for capturing the output "live" but rather after the whole process has finsihed. If you want live capture, you must instead use subprocess.Popen(...) and then use .communicate() or some other means of communication to catch the output from the subprocess.
Another comment I like to make, is that using shell=True is not recommended. Specifically not when handling unknown or not trusted input. It leaves the interpretation of cmd to the shell which can lead to all kind of security breaches and bad behavior. Instead, split cmd into a list (e.g. as I have done) and then pass that list to subprocess.run(...) and leave out shell=True.
I have Linux command that is running in Python.
roc = subprocess.Popen(['sshpass', '-p', password, 'rsync', '-avz', '--info=progress2', hostname, '/home/zurelsoft/test'],
stderr=subprocess.PIPE, stdout=subprocess.PIPE).communicate()[0]
print roc
This print the command processing only when it finishes execution. But, I want the output of the command as it is happening and stops when the command is fully executed. How it can be done?
you can check out Select and Select Example
Python’s select() function is a direct interface to the underlying operating system implementation. It monitors sockets, open files, and pipes (anything with a fileno() method that returns a valid file descriptor) until they become readable or writable, or a communication error occurs.
select() makes it easier to monitor multiple connections at the same time, and is more efficient than writing a polling loop in Python using socket timeouts, because the monitoring happens in the operating system network layer, instead of the interpreter.
If this does not help you can also look at
Persistent python subprocess
How can I read all availably data from subprocess.Popen.stdout (non blocking)?
This should work from commandline if you call it via subprocess.Popen as you do, but pass a pipe to sys.stdout by changing:
stdout=sys.stdout
Passing a pipe to an open, writable file object saves the output.
out = open("output.tmp","w")
subprocess.Popen(["ls","-R"],stdout = out)
out = open("output.tmp","r")
output = out.readlines()
I am attempting to wrap a program that is routinely used at work. When called with an insufficient number of arguments, or with a misspelled argument, the program issues a prompt to the user, asking for the needed input. As a consequence, when calling the routine with subprocess.Popen, the routine never sends any information to stdout or stderr when wrong parameters are passed. subprocess.Popen.communicate() and subprocess.Popen.read(1) both wait for a newline character before any information becomes available.
Is there any way to retrieve information from subprocess.Popen.stdout before the newline character is issued? If not, is there any method that can be used to determine whether the subprocess is waiting for input?
First thing to try: use the bufsize argument to Popen, and set it to 0:
subprocess.Popen(args, bufsize=0, ...)
Unfortunately, whether or not this works also depends upon how the subprocess flushes its output, and I presume you don't have much control over that.
On some platforms, when data written to stdout is flushed will actually change depending on whether the underlying I/O library detects an interactive terminal or a pipe. So while you might think the data is there waiting to be read — because that's how it works in a terminal window — it might actually be line buffered when you're running the same program as a subprocess from another within Python.
Added: I just realised that bufsize=0 is the default anyway. Nuts.
After asking around quite a bit, someone pointed me to the solution. Use pexpect.spawn and pexpect.expect. For example:
Bash "script" in a file titled prompt.sh to emulate the problem - read cannot be called directly from pexpect.spawn.
#!/bin/bash
read -p "This is a prompt: "
This will hang when called by subprocess.Popen. It can be handled by pexpect.spawn, though:
import pexpect
child = pexpect.spawn('./prompt.sh')
child.expect(search)
>>> 0
print child.after #Prints the matched text
>>> 'This is a prompt: '
A list, compiled regex, or list of compiled regex can also be used in place of the string in pexpect.expect to deal with differing prompts.
I have a small script that launches and, every half hour, feeds a command to a java program (game server manager) as if the user was typing it. However, after reading documentation and experimenting, I can't figure out how I can get two things:
1) A version which allows the user to type commands into the terminal windoe and they will be sent to the server manager input just as the "save-all" command is.
2) A version which remains running, but sends any new input to the system itself, removing the need for a second terminal window. This one is actually half-happening right now as when something is typed, there is no visual feedback, but once the program is ended, it's clear the terminal has received the input. For example, a list of directory contents will be there if "dir" was typed while the program was running. This one is more for understanding than practicality.
Thanks for the help. Here's the script:
from time import sleep
import sys,os
import subprocess
# Launches the server with specified parameters, waits however
# long is specified in saveInterval, then saves the map.
# Edit the value after "saveInterval =" to desired number of minutes.
# Default is 30
saveInterval = 30
# Start the server. Substitute the launch command with whatever you please.
p = subprocess.Popen('java -Xmx1024M -Xms1024M -jar minecraft_server.jar',
shell=False,
stdin=subprocess.PIPE);
while(True):
sleep(saveInterval*60)
# Comment out these two lines if you want the save to happen silently.
p.stdin.write("say Backing up map...\n")
p.stdin.flush()
# Stop all other saves to prevent corruption.
p.stdin.write("save-off\n")
p.stdin.flush()
sleep(1)
# Perform save
p.stdin.write("save-all\n")
p.stdin.flush()
sleep(10)
# Allow other saves again.
p.stdin.write("save-on\n")
p.stdin.flush()
Replace your sleep() with a call to select((sys.stdin, ), (), (), saveInterval*60) -- that will have the same timeout but listens on stdin for user commands. When select says you have input, read a line from sys.stdin and feed it to your process. When select indicates a timeout, perform the "save" command that you're doing now.
It won't completely solve your problem, but you might find python's cmd module useful. It's a way of easily implementing an extensible command line loop (often called a REPL).
You can run the program using screen, then you can send the input to the specific screen session instead of to the program directly (if you are in Windows just install cygwin).