Develop Reference

How to unit test program interacting with block devices

I have a program that interacts with and changes block devices (/dev/sda and such) on linux. I'm using various external commands (mostly commands from the fdisk and GNU fdisk packages) to control the devices. I have made a class that serves as the interface for most of the basic actions with block devices (for information like: What size is it? Where is it mounted? etc.)
Here is one such method querying the size of a partition:
def get_drive_size(device):
"""Returns the maximum size of the drive, in sectors.
:device the device identifier (/dev/sda and such)"""
query_proc = subprocess.Popen(["blockdev", "--getsz", device], stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
#blockdev returns the number of 512B blocks in a drive
output, error = query_proc.communicate()
exit_code = query_proc.returncode
if exit_code != 0:
raise Exception("Non-zero exit code", str(error, "utf-8")) #I have custom exceptions, this is slight pseudo-code
return int(output) #should always be valid
So this method accepts a block device path, and returns an integer. The tests will run as root, since this entire program will end up having to run as root anyway.
Should I try and test code such as these methods? If so, how? I could try and create and mount image files for each test, but this seems like a lot of overhead, and is probably error-prone itself. It expects block devices, so I cannot operate directly on image files in the file system.
I could try mocking, as some answers suggest, but this feels inadequate. It seems like I start to test the implementation of the method, if I mock the Popen object, rather than the output. Is this a correct assessment of proper unit-testing methodology in this case?
I am using python3 for this project, and I have not yet chosen a unit-testing framework. In the absence of other reasons, I will probably just use the default unittest framework included in Python.

You should look into the mock module (I think it's part of the unittest module now in Python 3).
It enables you to run tests without the need to depened in any external resources while giving you control over how the mocks interact with your code.
I would start from the docs in Voidspace
Here's an example:
import unittest2 as unittest
import mock
class GetDriveSizeTestSuite(unittest.TestCase):
#mock.patch('path/to/original/file.subprocess.Popen')
def test_a_scenario_with_mock_subprocess(self, mock_popen):
mock_popen.return_value.communicate.return_value = ('Expected_value', '')
mock_popen.return_value.returncode = '0'
self.assertEqual('expected_value', get_drive_size('some device'))

reload the currently running python script

In python ,There is a reload method to reload an imported module , but is there a method to reload the currently running script without restarting it, this would be very helpful in debugging a script and changing the code live while the script is running. In visual basic I remember a similar functionality was called "apply code changes", but I need a similar functionality as a function call like "refresh()" which will apply the code changes instantly.
This would work smoothly when an independent function in the script is modified and we need to immediately apply the code change without restarting the script.
Inshort will:
reload(self)
work?

reload(self) will not work, because reload() works on modules, not live instances of classes. What you want is some logic external to your main application, which checks whether it has to be reloaded. You have to think about what is needed to re-create your application state upon reload.
Some hints in this direction:
Guido van Rossum wrote once this: xreload.py; it does a bit more than reload() You would need a loop, which checks for changes every x seconds and applies this.
Also have a look at livecoding which basically does this. EDIT: I mistook this project for something else (which I didn't find now), sorry.
perhaps this SO question will help you

Perhaps you mean something like this:
import pdb
import importlib
from os.path import basename
def function():
print("hello world")
if __name__ == "__main__":
# import this module, but not as __main__ so everything other than this
# if statement is executed
mainmodname = basename(__file__)[:-3]
module = importlib.import_module(mainmodname)
while True:
# reload the module to check for changes
importlib.reload(module)
# update the globals of __main__ with the any new or changed
# functions or classes in the reloaded module
globals().update(vars(module))
function()
pdb.set_trace()
Run the code, then change the contents of function and enter c at the prompt to run the next iteration of the loop.

test.py
class Test(object):
def getTest(self):
return 'test1'
testReload.py
from test import Test
t = Test()
print t.getTest()
# change return value (test.py)
import importlib
module = importlib.import_module(Test.__module__)
reload(module)
from test import Test
t = Test()
print t.getTest()

Intro
reload is for imported modules. Documentation for reload advises against reloading __main__.
Reloading sys, __main__, builtins and other key modules is not recommended.
To achieve similar behavior on your script you will need to re-execute the script. This will - for normal scripts - also reset the the global state. I propose a solution.
NOTE
The solution I propose is very powerful and should only be used for code you trust. Automatically executing code from unknown sources can lead to a world of pain. Python is not a good environment for soapboxing unsafe code.
Solution
To programmatically execute a python script from another script you only need the built-in functions open, compile and exec.
Here is an example function that will re-execute the script it is in:
def refresh():
with open(__file__) as fo:
source_code = fo.read()
byte_code = compile(source_code, __file__, "exec")
exec(byte_code)
The above will in normal circumstances also re-set any global variables you might have. If you wish to keep these variables you should check weather or not those variables have already been set. This can be done with a try-except block covering NameError exceptions. But that can be tedious so I propose using a flag variable.
Here is an example using the flag variable:
in_main = __name__ == "__main__"
first_run = "flag" not in globals()
if in_main and first_run:
flag = True

None of these answers did the job properly for me, so I put together something very messy and very non-pythonic to do the job myself. Even after running it for several weeks, I am finding small issues and fixing them. One issue will be if your PWD/CWD changes.
Warning this is very ugly code. Perhaps someone will make it pretty, but it does work.
Not only does it create a refresh() function that properly reloads your script in a manner such that any Exceptions will properly display, but it creates refresh_<scriptname> functions for previously loaded scripts just-in-case you need to reload those.
Next I would probably add a require portion, so that scripts can reload other scripts -- but I'm not trying to make node.js here.
First, the "one-liner" that you need to insert in any script you want to refresh.
with open(os.path.dirname(__file__) + os.sep + 'refresh.py', 'r') as f: \
exec(compile(f.read().replace('__BASE__', \
os.path.basename(__file__).replace('.py', '')).replace('__FILE__', \
__file__), __file__, 'exec'))
And second, the actual refresh function which should be saved to refresh.py in the same directory. (See, room for improvement already).
def refresh(filepath = __file__, _globals = None, _locals = None):
print("Reading {}...".format(filepath))
if _globals is None:
_globals = globals()
_globals.update({
"__file__": filepath,
"__name__": "__main__",
})
with open(filepath, 'rb') as file:
exec(compile(file.read(), filepath, 'exec'), _globals, _locals)
def refresh___BASE__():
refresh("__FILE__")
Tested with Python 2.7 and 3.

Take a look at reload. You just need to install the plugin an use reload ./myscript.py, voilà

If you are running in an interactive session you could use ipython autoreload
autoreload reloads modules automatically before entering the execution of code typed at the IPython prompt.
Of course this also works on module level, so you would do something like:
>>>import myscript
>>>myscript.main()
*do some changes in myscript.py*
>>>myscript.main() #is now changed

Can Lupa be used to run untrusted lua code in python?

Let's say I create LuaRuntime with register_eval=False and an attribute_filter that prevents access to anything except a few python functions. Is it safe to assume that lua code won't be able to do os.system("rm -rf *") or something like that?

From looking at the Lupa doc:
Restricting Lua access to Python objects
Lupa provides a simple mechanism to control access to Python objects. Each attribute access can be passed through a filter function as follows...
It doesn't say anything about preventing or limiting access to facilities provided by Lua itself. If no other modifications are done to the LuaRuntime environment then a lua script can indeed do something like os.execute("rm -rf *").
To control what kind of environment the lua script works in you can use the setfenv and getfenv to sandbox the script before running it. For example:
import lupa
L = lupa.LuaRuntime()
sandbox = L.eval("{}")
setfenv = L.eval("setfenv")
sandbox.print = L.globals().print
sandbox.math = L.globals().math
sandbox.string = L.globals().string
sandbox.foobar = foobar
# etc...
setfenv(0, sandbox)
Now doing something like L.execute("os.execute('rm -rf *')") will result in a script error.

Getting python -m module to work for a module implemented in C

I have a pure C module for Python and I'd like to be able to invoke it using the python -m modulename approach. This works fine with modules implemented in Python and one obvious workaround is to add an extra file for that purpose. However I really want to keep things to my one single distributed binary and not add a second file just for this workaround.
I don't care how hacky the solution is.
If you do try to use a C module with -m then you get an error message No code object available for <modulename>.

-m implementation is in runpy._run_module_as_main . Its essence is:
mod_name, loader, code, fname = _get_module_details(mod_name)
<...>
exec code in run_globals
A compiled module has no "code object" accociated with it so the 1st statement fails with ImportError("No code object available for <module>"). You need to extend runpy - specifically, _get_module_details - to make it work for a compiled module. I suggest returning a code object constructed from the aforementioned "import mod; mod.main()":
(python 2.6.1)
code = loader.get_code(mod_name)
if code is None:
+ if loader.etc[2]==imp.C_EXTENSION:
+ code=compile("import %(mod)s; %(mod)s.main()"%{'mod':mod_name},"<extension loader wrapper>","exec")
+ else:
+ raise ImportError("No code object available for %s" % mod_name)
- raise ImportError("No code object available for %s" % mod_name)
filename = _get_filename(loader, mod_name)
(Update: fixed an error in format string)
Now...
C:\Documents and Settings\Пользователь>python -m pythoncom
C:\Documents and Settings\Пользователь>
This still won't work for builtin modules. Again, you'll need to invent some notion of "main code unit" for them.
Update:
I've looked through the internals called from _get_module_details and can say with confidence that they don't even attempt to retrieve a code object from a module of type other than imp.PY_SOURCE, imp.PY_COMPILED or imp.PKG_DIRECTORY . So you have to patch this machinery this way or another for -m to work. Python fails before retrieving anything from your module (it doesn't even check if the dll is a valid module) so you can't do anything by building it in a special way.

Does your requirement of single distributed binary allow for the use of an egg? If so, you could package your module with a __main__.py with your calling code and the usual __init__.py...
If you're really adamant, maybe you could extend pkgutil.ImpLoader.get_code to return something for C modules (e.g., maybe a special __code__ function). To do that, I think you're going to have to actually change it in the Python source. Even then, pkgutil uses exec to execute the code block, so it would have to be Python code anyway.
TL;DR: I think you're euchred. While Python modules have code at the global level that runs at import time, C modules don't; they're mostly just a dict namespace. Thus, running a C module doesn't really make sense from a conceptual standpoint. You need some real Python code to direct the action.

I think that you need to start by making a separate file in Python and getting the -m option to work. Then, turn that Python file into a code object and incorporate it into your binary in such a way that it continues to work.
Look up setuptools in PyPi, download the .egg and take a look at the file. You will see that the first few bytes contain a Python script and these are followed by a .ZIP file bytestream. Something similar may work for you.

There's a brand new thing that may solve your problems easily. I've just learnt about it and it looks preety decent to me: http://code.google.com/p/pts-mini-gpl/wiki/StaticPython

How can I add a command to the Python interactive shell?

I'm trying to save myself just a few keystrokes for a command I type fairly regularly in Python.
In my python startup script, I define a function called load which is similar to import, but adds some functionality. It takes a single string:
def load(s):
# Do some stuff
return something
In order to call this function I have to type
>>> load('something')
I would rather be able to simply type:
>>> load something
I am running Python with readline support, so I know there exists some programmability there, but I don't know if this sort of thing is possible using it.
I attempted to get around this by using the InteractivConsole and creating an instance of it in my startup file, like so:
import code, re, traceback
class LoadingInteractiveConsole(code.InteractiveConsole):
def raw_input(self, prompt = ""):
s = raw_input(prompt)
match = re.match('^load\s+(.+)', s)
if match:
module = match.group(1)
try:
load(module)
print "Loaded " + module
except ImportError:
traceback.print_exc()
return ''
else:
return s
console = LoadingInteractiveConsole()
console.interact("")
This works with the caveat that I have to hit Ctrl-D twice to exit the python interpreter: once to get out of my custom console, once to get out of the real one.
Is there a way to do this without writing a custom C program and embedding the interpreter into it?
Edit
Out of channel, I had the suggestion of appending this to the end of my startup file:
import sys
sys.exit()
It works well enough, but I'm still interested in alternative solutions.

You could try ipython - which gives a python shell which does allow many things including automatic parentheses which gives you the function call as you requested.

I think you want the cmd module.
See a tutorial here:
http://wiki.python.org/moin/CmdModule

Hate to answer my own question, but there hasn't been an answer that works for all the versions of Python I use. Aside from the solution I posted in my question edit (which is what I'm now using), here's another:
Edit .bashrc to contain the following lines:
alias python3='python3 ~/py/shellreplace.py'
alias python='python ~/py/shellreplace.py'
alias python27='python27 ~/py/shellreplace.py'
Then simply move all of the LoadingInteractiveConsole code into the file ~/py/shellreplace.py Once the script finishes executing, python will cease executing, and the improved interactive session will be seamless.