We Keep Coding

Run a program in the background and then open another program using subprocess

On the terminal, I have two programs to run using subprocess
First, I will call ./matrix-odas & so the first program will run in the background and I can then type the second command. The first command will return some messages.
The second command ~/odas/bin/odaslive -vc ~/odas/config/odaslive/matrix_creator.cfg will open the second program and it will keep running and keep printing out text. I'd like to use subprocess to open these programs and capture both outputs.
I have never used subprocess before and following tutorials, I am writing the script on Jupyter notebook (python 3.7) in order to see the output easily.
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
p = Popen(["./matrix-odas", "&"], stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE, cwd=wd, universal_newlines=True)
stdout, stderr = p.communicate()
print(stdout)
This is the code that i tried to open the first program. But Jupyter notebook always gets stuck at p.communicate() and I can't see the messages. Without running the first program in the background, I won't be able to get the command prompt after the messages are printed.
I would like to know what subprocess function should I use to solve this issue and which platform is better to test subprocess code. Any suggestions will be appreciated. Thank you so much!

From this example at the end of this section of the docs
with Popen(["ifconfig"], stdout=PIPE) as proc:
log.write(proc.stdout.read())
it looks like you can access stdout (and I would assume stderr) from the object directly. I am not sure whether you need to use Popen as a context manager to access that property or not.

Python script using subprocess to get PID and kill it acts weird when launched from outside its sitting directory

Thank you in advance for the time you'll give to read this question. I am learning Python and I looked up a lot before asking here, please forgive me for the newbie question.
So I created this script in python 3 using subprocess module to search for another python script's PID, while only knowing the beginning of the script's name and terminate it nicely.
Basically I run python clocks on my LCD screen through Raspberry and I2C, and I terminate the script, clear the LCD and turn it off. This "off" script code is provided below.
The issue is that when I run it from the directory it sits in with a:
python3 off.py
It works perfectly, getting parsing and terminating the PID, then turning off the LCD display.
Ideally I want to trigger it through telegram-cli because I did it in bash and it worked nicely, I find it to be a nice feature. In python it fails.
So I tested and it appears that when I try to launch it from another directory like this:
python3 ~/code/off.py
The grep subprocess returns more than the one PID it returns normally when launched from the script residing directory. For instance (with python3 -v):
kill: failed to parse argument: '25977
26044'
The second PID number is from a sub process created by the script, I can't seem to find what it is as it terminates when the script ends but fails it initial purpose.
Any help in understanding what is happening here would be really appreciated.
I came so far, as show below, from two ugly lines of bash mixed with a call to an dummy four lines python scripts, so I really feel I am getting close to a proper way of achieving my first real python script.
I tried to decompose the script line by line in the interpreter and could not reproduce the error, everything behave as expected. I only get this double PID result when running the script from an outer location.
Thank you in advance for any helpful insight on how to understand what is happening!
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import subprocess
import I2C_LCD_driver
import string
# Defining variables for searched strings and string encoding
searched_process_name = 'lcd_'
cut_grep_out_of_results = 'grep'
result_string_encoding = 'utf-8'
mylcd = I2C_LCD_driver.lcd()
LCD_NOBACKLIGHT = 0x00
run = True
def kill_script():
# Listing processes and getting the searched process
ps_process = subprocess.Popen(["ps", "aux"], stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
grep_process = subprocess.Popen(["grep", "-i", searched_process_name], stdin=ps_process.stdout, stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
# The .stdout.close() lines below allow the previous process to receive a SIGPIPE if the next process exits.
ps_process.stdout.close()
# Cleaning the result until only the PID number is returned in a string
grep_cutout = subprocess.Popen(["grep", "-v", cut_grep_out_of_results], stdin=grep_process.stdout, stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
grep_process.stdout.close()
awk = subprocess.Popen(["cut", "-c", "10-14"], stdin=grep_cutout.stdout, stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
grep_cutout.stdout.close()
output = awk.communicate()[0]
clean_output = output.decode(result_string_encoding)
clean_output_no_new_line = clean_output.rstrip()
clean_output_no_quote = clean_output_no_new_line.replace("'", '')
PID = clean_output_no_quote
# Terminating the LCD script process
subprocess.Popen(["kill", "-9", PID])
while run:
kill_script()
# Cleaning and shutting off LCD screen
mylcd.lcd_clear()
mylcd.lcd_device.write_cmd(LCD_NOBACKLIGHT)
break

I found out the reason of this weird comportment. An error on my end:
I forgot I called some directories with a name including the characters string I was running grep -i against provoking the double result when running the script from outside its directory using its full path.
Turns out the script runs pretty well using subprocess.
So in the end, I renamed the scripts I wanted to terminate with disp_ rather than lcd_ and added shell=False to my subprocesses to make sure there were no risk of unwantedly sending the output to bash while the running the script.

Pyinstaller executable doesn't run processes when hidden

I'm trying to run a single-file python executable packaged with PyInstaller. The script contains system commands that need to be executed. However, when I attempt to run them (on windows) they do not execute. The thing is, they only fail to execute when the PyInstaller option no-console is used, which hides the console and runs it in the background.
I am using the following options: --noconsole and -F.
I have not only tried the subprocess.open function, but also os.popen(), both of which do not work.
Also, I need console output, so os.system() will not be an option... please answer with this in mind. Although, this function did actually execute the commands, so I think getting output is the issue. I am assuming that I have to change the standard output or something, or maybe if a command is executed without a console, the output is lost or never generated in the first place. Sorry if I sound inexperienced.
I do not have any antivirus software running on my computer, and no Windows Defender, etc. messages are appearing. I understand that this is a precarious combination - running system commands whilst hidden - I only wish to make a non-malicious program that kills another program every minute. Sorry if there is anything left unclarified... just ask if anything is unclear. Thanks :)
EDIT
Here's some code to help
command = data['command']
command_split = command.split(" ")
p = subprocess.Popen(command_split, shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
out, err = p.communicate()
result = out.decode() if out else err.decode()
io.emit("client:console_output", {
'output':result,
'adminID':data['adminID']
})
EDIT 2
Understand that this function is working when the console is not hidden; therefore, it is nothing to do with the logic or code, it is solely because it is being hidden. Here is the output anyway.
x = "taskkill /im chrome.exe /f"
print(x.split(" "))
-> ['taskkill', '/im', 'chrome.exe', '/f']

You need to use subprocess.PIPE to redirect the process output to a variable. You also need to handle subprocess stdin and close it manually.
Then you can simply disable console with -w or --noconsole flag.
import subprocess
p = subprocess.Popen(["ipconfig"], shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, stdin=subprocess.PIPE)
out, err = p.communicate()
p.stdin.close()
result = out.decode() if out else err.decode()

Start a subprocess, wait for it to complete and then retrieve data in Python

I'm struggling to get some python script to start a subprocess, wait until it completes and then retrieve the required data. I'm quite new to Python.
The command I wish to run as a subprocess is
./bin.testing/Eva -t --suite="temp0"
Running that command by hand in the Linux terminal produces:
in terminal mode
Evaluation error = 16.7934
I want to run the command as a python sub-process, and receive the output back. However, everything I try seems to skip the second line (ultimately, it's the second line that I want.) At the moment, I have this:
def job(self,fen_file):
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
from sys import exit
try:
eva=Popen('{0}/Eva -t --suite"{0}"'.format(self.exedir,fen_file),shell=True,stdout=PIPE,stderr=PIPE)
stdout,stderr=eva.communicate()
except:
print ('Error running test suite '+fen_file)
exit("Stopping")
print(stdout)
.
.
.
return 0
All this seems to produce is
in terminal mode
0
with the important line missing. The print statement is just so I can see what I am getting back from the sub-process -- the intention is that it will be replaced with code that processes the number from the second line and returns the output (here I'm just returning 0 just so I can get this particular bit to work first. The caller of this function prints the result, which is why there is a zero at the end of the output.) exedir is just the directory of the executable for the sub-process, and fen-file is just an ascii file that the sub-process needs. I have tried removing the 'in terminal mode' from the source code of the sub-process and re compiling it, but that doesn't work -- it still doesn't return the important second line.
Thanks in advance; I expect what I am doing wrong is really very simple.
Edit: I ought to add that the subprocess Eva can take a second or two to complete.

Since the 2nd line is an error message, it's probably stored in your stderr variable!
To know for sure you can print your stderr in your code, or you can run the program on the command line and see if the output is split into stdout and stderr. One easy way is to do ./bin.testing/Eva -t --suite="temp0" > /dev/null. Any messages you get are stderr since stdout is redirected to /dev/null.
Also, typically with Popen the shell=True option is discouraged unless really needed. Instead pass a list:
[os.path.join(self.exedir, 'Eva'), '-t', '--suite=' + fen_file], shell=False, ...
This can avoid problems down the line if one of your arguments would normally be interpreted by the shell. (Note, I removed the ""'s, because the shell would normally eat those for you!)

Try using subprocess check_output.
output_lines = subprocess.check_output(['./bin.testing/Eva', '-t', '--suite="temp0"'])
for line in output_lines.splitlines():
print(line)

Reading process output

I'm writing a simple wrapper over python debugger (pdb) and I need to parse pdb output. But I have a problem reading text from process pipe.
Example of my code:
import subprocess, threading, time
def readProcessOutput(process):
while not process.poll():
print(process.stdout.readline())
process = subprocess.Popen('python -m pdb script.py', shell=True, universal_newlines=True,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT, stdin=subprocess.PIPE)
read_thread = threading.Thread(target=readProcessOutput, args=(process,))
read_thread.start()
while True:
time.sleep(0.5)
When i execute given command (python -m pdb script.py) in OS shell I get results like this:
> c:\develop\script.py(1)<module>()
-> print('hello, world!')
(Pdb)
But when i run my script i get only two lines, but can't get pdb prompt. Writing commands to stdin after this has no effect. So my question is:
why I cannot read third line? How can I avoid this problem and get correct output?
Platform: Windows XP, Python 3.3

The third line can not be read by readline() because it is not terminated yet by the end of line. You see usually the cursor after "(pdb) " until you write anything + enter.
The communication to processes that have some prompt is usually more complicated. It proved to me to write also an independent thread for data writer first for easier testing the communication in order to be sure that the main thread never freezes if too much is tried to be written or read. Then it can be simplified again.