Related
I'm trying to run "docker-compose pull" from inside a Python automation script and to incrementally display the same output that Docker command would print if it was run directly from the shell. This command prints a line for each Docker image found in the system, incrementally updates each line with the Docker image's download progress (a percentage) and replaces this percentage with a "done" when the download has completed. I first tried getting the command output with subprocess.poll() and (blocking) readline() calls:
import shlex
import subprocess
def run(command, shell=False):
p = subprocess.Popen(shlex.split(command), stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, shell=shell)
while True:
# print one output line
output_line = p.stdout.readline().decode('utf8')
error_output_line = p.stderr.readline().decode('utf8')
if output_line:
print(output_line.strip())
if error_output_line:
print(error_output_line.strip())
# check if process finished
return_code = p.poll()
if return_code is not None and output_line == '' and error_output_line == '':
break
if return_code > 0:
print("%s failed, error code %d" % (command, return_code))
run("docker-compose pull")
The code gets stuck in the first (blocking) readline() call. Then I tried to do the same without blocking:
import select
import shlex
import subprocess
import sys
import time
def run(command, shell=False):
p = subprocess.Popen(shlex.split(command), stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, shell=shell)
io_poller = select.poll()
io_poller.register(p.stdout.fileno(), select.POLLIN)
io_poller.register(p.stderr.fileno(), select.POLLIN)
while True:
# poll IO for output
io_events_list = []
while not io_events_list:
time.sleep(1)
io_events_list = io_poller.poll(0)
# print new output
for event in io_events_list:
# must be tested because non-registered events (eg POLLHUP) can also be returned
if event[1] & select.POLLIN:
if event[0] == p.stdout.fileno():
output_str = p.stdout.read(1).decode('utf8')
print(output_str, end="")
if event[0] == p.stderr.fileno():
error_output_str = p.stderr.read(1).decode('utf8')
print(error_output_str, end="")
# check if process finished
# when subprocess finishes, iopoller.poll(0) returns a list with 2 select.POLLHUP events
# (one for stdout, one for stderr) and does not enter in the inner loop
return_code = p.poll()
if return_code is not None:
break
if return_code > 0:
print("%s failed, error code %d" % (command, return_code))
run("docker-compose pull")
This works, but only the final lines (with "done" at the end) are printed to the screen, when all Docker images downloads have been completed.
Both methods work fine with a command with simpler output such as "ls". Maybe the problem is related with how this Docker command prints incrementally to screen, overwriting already written lines ? Is there a safe way to incrementally show the exact output of a command in the command line when running it via a Python script?
EDIT: 2nd code block was corrected
Always openSTDIN as a pipe, and if you are not using it, close it immediately.
p.stdout.read() will block until the pipe is closed, so your polling code does nothing useful here. It needs modifications.
I suggest not to use shell=True
Instead of *.readline(), try with *.read(1) and wait for "\n"
Of course you can do what you want in Python, the question is how. Because, a child process might have different ideas about how its output should look like, that's when trouble starts. E.g. the process might want explicitly a terminal at the other end, not your process. Or a lot of such simple nonsense. Also, a buffering may also cause problems. You can try starting Python in unbuffered mode to check. (/usr/bin/python -U)
If nothing works, then use pexpect automation library instead of subprocess.
I have found a solution, based on the first code block of my question:
def run(command,shell=False):
p = subprocess.Popen(shlex.split(command), stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, shell=shell)
while True:
# read one char at a time
output_line = p.stderr.read(1).decode("utf8")
if output_line != "":
print(output_line,end="")
else:
# check if process finished
return_code = p.poll()
if return_code is not None:
if return_code > 0:
raise Exception("Command %s failed" % command)
break
return return_code
Notice that docker-compose uses stderr to print its progress instead of stdout. #Dalen has explained that some applications do it when they want that their results are pipeable somewhere, for instance a file, but also want to be able to show their progress.
I am using Python 2.6.6 and failed to re-direct the Beeline(Hive) SQL query output returning multiple rows to a file on Unix using ">". For simplicity's sake, I replaced the SQL query with simple "ls" command on current directory and outputting to a text file.
Please ignore syntax of function sendfile. I want help to tweak the function "callcmd" to pipe the stdout onto the text file.
def callcmd(cmd, shl):
logging.info('> '+' '.join(map(str,cmd)))
#return 0;
start_time = time.time()
command_process = subprocess.Popen(cmd, shell=shl, stdin=subprocess.PIPE, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT, universal_newlines=True)
command_output = command_process.communicate()[0]
logging.info(command_output)
elapsed_time = time.time() - start_time
logging.info(time.strftime("%H:%M:%S",time.gmtime(elapsed_time))+' = time to complete (hh:mm:ss)')
if (command_process.returncode != 0):
logging.error('ERROR ON COMMAND: '+' '.join(map(str,cmd)))
logging.error('ERROR CODE: '+str(ret_code))
return command_process.returncode
cmd=['ls', ' >', '/home/input/xyz.txt']
ret_code = callcmd(cmd, False)
Your command (i.e. cmd) could be ['sh', '-c', 'ls > ~/xyz.txt']. That would mean that the output of ls is never passed to Python, it happens entirely in the spawned shell – so you can't log the output. In that case, I'd have used return_code = subprocess.call(cmd), no need for Popen and communicate.
Equivalently, assuming you use bash or similar, you can simply use
subprocess.call('ls > ~/test.txt', shell=True)
If you want to access the output, e.g. for logging, you could use
s = subprocess.check_output(['ls'])
and then write that to a file like you would regularly in Python. To check for a non-zero exit code, handle the CalledProcessError that is raised in such cases.
Here the stdout in command_output is written to a file. You don't need to use any redirection although an alternative might be to have the python print to stdout, and then you would redirect that in your shell to a file.
#!/usr/bin/python
import subprocess
cmd=['ls']
command_process = subprocess.Popen(
cmd,
shell='/bin/bash',
stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.STDOUT,
universal_newlines=True
)
command_output = command_process.communicate()[0]
if (command_process.returncode != 0):
logging.error('ERROR ON COMMAND: '+' '.join(map(str,cmd)))
logging.error('ERROR CODE: '+str(ret_code))
f = open('listing.txt','w')
f.write(command_output)
f.close()
I added this piece of code to my code and It works fine.Thanks to #Snohdo
f = open('listing.txt','w')
f.write(command_output)
f.close()
I'm using subprocess to run a command line program from a Python (3.5.2) script, which I am running in a Jupyter notebook. The subprocess takes a long time to run and so I would like its stdout to be printed live to the screen in the Jupyter notebook.
I can do this no problem in a normal Python script run from the terminal. I do this using:
def run_command(cmd):
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
import shlex
with Popen(shlex.split(cmd), stdout=PIPE, bufsize=1, universal_newlines=True) as p:
for line in p.stdout:
print(line, end='')
exit_code = p.poll()
return exit_code
However, when I run the script in a Jupyter notebook, it does not print the stdout live to the screen. Instead, it prints everything after the subprocess has finished running.
Does anyone have any ideas on how to remedy this?
Many thanks,
Johnny
The ipython notebook has it's own support for running shell commands. If you don't need to capture with subprocess stuff you can just do
cmd = 'ls -l'
!{cmd}
Output from commands executed with ! is automatically piped through the notebook.
If you set stdout = None (this is the default, so you can omit the stdout argument altogether), then your process should write its output to the terminal running your IPython notebook server.
This happens because the default behavior is for subprocess to inherit from the parent file handlers (see docs).
Your code would look like this:
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
import shlex
def run_command(cmd):
p = Popen(shlex.split(cmd), bufsize=1, universal_newlines=True)
return p.poll()
This won't print to the notebook in browser, but at least you will be able to see the output from your subprocess asynchronously while other code is running.
Hope this helps.
Jupyter mucks with stdout and stderr. This should get what you want, and give you a more useful exception when the command fails to boot.
import signal
import subprocess as sp
class VerboseCalledProcessError(sp.CalledProcessError):
def __str__(self):
if self.returncode and self.returncode < 0:
try:
msg = "Command '%s' died with %r." % (
self.cmd, signal.Signals(-self.returncode))
except ValueError:
msg = "Command '%s' died with unknown signal %d." % (
self.cmd, -self.returncode)
else:
msg = "Command '%s' returned non-zero exit status %d." % (
self.cmd, self.returncode)
return f'{msg}\n' \
f'Stdout:\n' \
f'{self.output}\n' \
f'Stderr:\n' \
f'{self.stderr}'
def bash(cmd, print_stdout=True, print_stderr=True):
proc = sp.Popen(cmd, stderr=sp.PIPE, stdout=sp.PIPE, shell=True, universal_newlines=True,
executable='/bin/bash')
all_stdout = []
all_stderr = []
while proc.poll() is None:
for stdout_line in proc.stdout:
if stdout_line != '':
if print_stdout:
print(stdout_line, end='')
all_stdout.append(stdout_line)
for stderr_line in proc.stderr:
if stderr_line != '':
if print_stderr:
print(stderr_line, end='', file=sys.stderr)
all_stderr.append(stderr_line)
stdout_text = ''.join(all_stdout)
stderr_text = ''.join(all_stderr)
if proc.wait() != 0:
raise VerboseCalledProcessError(proc.returncode, cmd, stdout_text, stderr_text)
Replacing the for loop with the explicit readline() call worked for me.
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
import shlex
def run_command(cmd):
with Popen(shlex.split(cmd), stdout=PIPE, bufsize=1, universal_newlines=True) as p:
while True:
line = p.stdout.readline()
if not line:
break
print(line)
exit_code = p.poll()
return exit_code
Something is still broken about their iterators, even 4 years later.
I have a python script which executes the following command using subprocess, but it gets stuck when some error occurs:
import subprocess
COMMAND = " Application.exe arg1 arg2"
process = subprocess.Popen(COMMAND, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=None, shell=True)
while process.poll() is None:
output = process.stdout.readline()
print output,
output:
There was a communication problem.
Failed.
Press enter to exit...
Because of the above output, my program is not able to exit until I press any key manually. Please help show me how to handle the above response and exit my code. The above program works good if there is no error.
First, the last two lines of your code (within the while loop) need to be properly indented:
import subprocess
COMMAND = " Application.exe arg1 arg2"
process = subprocess.Popen(COMMAND, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=None, shell=True)
while process.poll() is None:
output = process.stdout.readline()
print output,
Second, if your COMMAND finishes too quickly, then your while loop may end before you've read the data completely. To remedy this issue, use the communicate() method:
output = process.communicate()[0]
print output,
Here are the docs related to Popen.communicate()
I want to subprocess.Popen() rsync.exe in Windows, and print the stdout in Python.
My code works, but it doesn't catch the progress until a file transfer is done! I want to print the progress for each file in real time.
Using Python 3.1 now since I heard it should be better at handling IO.
import subprocess, time, os, sys
cmd = "rsync.exe -vaz -P source/ dest/"
p, line = True, 'start'
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd,
shell=True,
bufsize=64,
stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
for line in p.stdout:
print(">>> " + str(line.rstrip()))
p.stdout.flush()
Some rules of thumb for subprocess.
Never use shell=True. It needlessly invokes an extra shell process to call your program.
When calling processes, arguments are passed around as lists. sys.argv in python is a list, and so is argv in C. So you pass a list to Popen to call subprocesses, not a string.
Don't redirect stderr to a PIPE when you're not reading it.
Don't redirect stdin when you're not writing to it.
Example:
import subprocess, time, os, sys
cmd = ["rsync.exe", "-vaz", "-P", "source/" ,"dest/"]
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
for line in iter(p.stdout.readline, b''):
print(">>> " + line.rstrip())
That said, it is probable that rsync buffers its output when it detects that it is connected to a pipe instead of a terminal. This is the default behavior - when connected to a pipe, programs must explicitly flush stdout for realtime results, otherwise standard C library will buffer.
To test for that, try running this instead:
cmd = [sys.executable, 'test_out.py']
and create a test_out.py file with the contents:
import sys
import time
print ("Hello")
sys.stdout.flush()
time.sleep(10)
print ("World")
Executing that subprocess should give you "Hello" and wait 10 seconds before giving "World". If that happens with the python code above and not with rsync, that means rsync itself is buffering output, so you are out of luck.
A solution would be to connect direct to a pty, using something like pexpect.
I know this is an old topic, but there is a solution now. Call the rsync with option --outbuf=L. Example:
cmd=['rsync', '-arzv','--backup','--outbuf=L','source/','dest']
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
for line in iter(p.stdout.readline, b''):
print '>>> {}'.format(line.rstrip())
Depending on the use case, you might also want to disable the buffering in the subprocess itself.
If the subprocess will be a Python process, you could do this before the call:
os.environ["PYTHONUNBUFFERED"] = "1"
Or alternatively pass this in the env argument to Popen.
Otherwise, if you are on Linux/Unix, you can use the stdbuf tool. E.g. like:
cmd = ["stdbuf", "-oL"] + cmd
See also here about stdbuf or other options.
On Linux, I had the same problem of getting rid of the buffering. I finally used "stdbuf -o0" (or, unbuffer from expect) to get rid of the PIPE buffering.
proc = Popen(['stdbuf', '-o0'] + cmd, stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE)
stdout = proc.stdout
I could then use select.select on stdout.
See also https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/25372/
for line in p.stdout:
...
always blocks until the next line-feed.
For "real-time" behaviour you have to do something like this:
while True:
inchar = p.stdout.read(1)
if inchar: #neither empty string nor None
print(str(inchar), end='') #or end=None to flush immediately
else:
print('') #flush for implicit line-buffering
break
The while-loop is left when the child process closes its stdout or exits.
read()/read(-1) would block until the child process closed its stdout or exited.
Your problem is:
for line in p.stdout:
print(">>> " + str(line.rstrip()))
p.stdout.flush()
the iterator itself has extra buffering.
Try doing like this:
while True:
line = p.stdout.readline()
if not line:
break
print line
You cannot get stdout to print unbuffered to a pipe (unless you can rewrite the program that prints to stdout), so here is my solution:
Redirect stdout to sterr, which is not buffered. '<cmd> 1>&2' should do it. Open the process as follows: myproc = subprocess.Popen('<cmd> 1>&2', stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
You cannot distinguish from stdout or stderr, but you get all output immediately.
Hope this helps anyone tackling this problem.
To avoid caching of output you might wanna try pexpect,
child = pexpect.spawn(launchcmd,args,timeout=None)
while True:
try:
child.expect('\n')
print(child.before)
except pexpect.EOF:
break
PS : I know this question is pretty old, still providing the solution which worked for me.
PPS: got this answer from another question
p = subprocess.Popen(command,
bufsize=0,
universal_newlines=True)
I am writing a GUI for rsync in python, and have the same probelms. This problem has troubled me for several days until i find this in pyDoc.
If universal_newlines is True, the file objects stdout and stderr are opened as text files in universal newlines mode. Lines may be terminated by any of '\n', the Unix end-of-line convention, '\r', the old Macintosh convention or '\r\n', the Windows convention. All of these external representations are seen as '\n' by the Python program.
It seems that rsync will output '\r' when translate is going on.
if you run something like this in a thread and save the ffmpeg_time property in a property of a method so you can access it, it would work very nice
I get outputs like this:
output be like if you use threading in tkinter
input = 'path/input_file.mp4'
output = 'path/input_file.mp4'
command = "ffmpeg -y -v quiet -stats -i \"" + str(input) + "\" -metadata title=\"#alaa_sanatisharif\" -preset ultrafast -vcodec copy -r 50 -vsync 1 -async 1 \"" + output + "\""
process = subprocess.Popen(command, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT, universal_newlines=True, shell=True)
for line in self.process.stdout:
reg = re.search('\d\d:\d\d:\d\d', line)
ffmpeg_time = reg.group(0) if reg else ''
print(ffmpeg_time)
Change the stdout from the rsync process to be unbuffered.
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd,
shell=True,
bufsize=0, # 0=unbuffered, 1=line-buffered, else buffer-size
stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
I've noticed that there is no mention of using a temporary file as intermediate. The following gets around the buffering issues by outputting to a temporary file and allows you to parse the data coming from rsync without connecting to a pty. I tested the following on a linux box, and the output of rsync tends to differ across platforms, so the regular expressions to parse the output may vary:
import subprocess, time, tempfile, re
pipe_output, file_name = tempfile.TemporaryFile()
cmd = ["rsync", "-vaz", "-P", "/src/" ,"/dest"]
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=pipe_output,
stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
while p.poll() is None:
# p.poll() returns None while the program is still running
# sleep for 1 second
time.sleep(1)
last_line = open(file_name).readlines()
# it's possible that it hasn't output yet, so continue
if len(last_line) == 0: continue
last_line = last_line[-1]
# Matching to "[bytes downloaded] number% [speed] number:number:number"
match_it = re.match(".* ([0-9]*)%.* ([0-9]*:[0-9]*:[0-9]*).*", last_line)
if not match_it: continue
# in this case, the percentage is stored in match_it.group(1),
# time in match_it.group(2). We could do something with it here...
In Python 3, here's a solution, which takes a command off the command line and delivers real-time nicely decoded strings as they are received.
Receiver (receiver.py):
import subprocess
import sys
cmd = sys.argv[1:]
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
for line in p.stdout:
print("received: {}".format(line.rstrip().decode("utf-8")))
Example simple program that could generate real-time output (dummy_out.py):
import time
import sys
for i in range(5):
print("hello {}".format(i))
sys.stdout.flush()
time.sleep(1)
Output:
$python receiver.py python dummy_out.py
received: hello 0
received: hello 1
received: hello 2
received: hello 3
received: hello 4