Develop Reference

python console closes when opened from c++ with ShellExecuteEx

I have to open a python script from c++. For this I decided to use ShellExecuteEx like below:
SHELLEXECUTEINFO ShExecInfo = { 0 };
ShExecInfo.cbSize = sizeof(SHELLEXECUTEINFO);
ShExecInfo.fMask = SEE_MASK_NOCLOSEPROCESS;
ShExecInfo.hwnd = NULL;
ShExecInfo.lpVerb = NULL;
ShExecInfo.lpFile = "python";
ShExecInfo.lpParameters = strParams.c_str();
ShExecInfo.lpDirectory = NULL;
ShExecInfo.nShow = SW_NORMAL;
ShExecInfo.hInstApp = NULL;
ShellExecuteEx(&ShExecInfo);
WaitForSingleObject(ShExecInfo.hProcess, INFINITE);
CloseHandle(ShExecInfo.hProcess);
size_t exeResult = (size_t)ShExecInfo.hInstApp;
// check if the executable ran
if (exeResult <= 32)
{
However the python script ends without getting a chance to see the output error / traceback:
if __name__ == "__main__":
f = open("python_log.txt", "w")
f.write("hello")
try:
main()
except Exception as e:
print("An exception occurred", str(e))
f.write(str(e))
var = traceback.format_exc()
print(var)
f.write(var)
f.close()
wait = input("Press Enter to exit.")
I don't know what else to add or how to see the output of the python script that is called by the c++ code. I've thought about running the cmd and start the py script from there, so that I have the output, but I didn't find a way to implement it in c++, it just starts the cmd and no calling the script.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Thank you!

If you set the SEE_MASK_NO_CONSOLE flag in the fMask member of the SHELLEXECUTEINFO structure before calling ShellExecuteEx, then the Python interpreter will inherit your C++ program's console (assuming it is attached to one), instead of a new console being created for the Python interpreter. That way, your C++ program will have full control on when the console is closed. The console won't automatically be closed when the Python interpreter exits, as long as your C++ program is still running and attached to the console.
If your C++ program is not already attached to a console, then you can attach it to one by calling the function AllocConsole. You should do this before calling ShellExecuteEx.

Hide "Python" on Task Manager

I have python program and this is compiled file(.pyc)
I wrote Launcher with C#. This launcher starts this Python program (pyc file).
But as you see in picture, my python program's top name is "Python", how can i hide this Python?
Thanks.
C# Launch python code:
private bool ProcessCalistir(string path, string Args = "", bool wait = false)
{
Process proc = new Process();
//proc.StartInfo.WorkingDirectory = PythonKlasor;
proc.StartInfo.WorkingDirectory = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory;
proc.StartInfo.FileName = path;
proc.StartInfo.Arguments = Args;
proc.StartInfo.UseShellExecute = false;
proc.StartInfo.CreateNoWindow = true;
proc.StartInfo.Verb = "runas";
proc.Start();
if (wait) proc.WaitForExit();
return true;
}
ProcessCalistir("python.exe", "MyPythonProgram.pyc");

How can I make a linux background process (in c) that launches a Python script

I made a Linux background process (in c++) that monitors a directory and attempts to launch a Python script if a certain file appears in that directory. My issue is that the child process responsible for launching the Python script exits immediately after the execvp function is called and I can't understand why. All of the necessary files are under root's ownership. Here is my code if it helps. Thank you in advance for any pointers! I have marked the error in my code where the error occurs. I have also included the Python script to be called
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdio.h>
using namespace std;
char* arguments[3];
FILE* fd;
const char* logFilePath = "/home/BluetoothProject/Logs/fileMonitorLogs.txt";
char* rfcommPath = (char*)"/home/BluetoothProject/RFCOMMOut.py";
void logToFile(const char*);
void doWork();
void logToFile(const char* str) {
fd = fopen(logFilePath, "a");
fprintf(fd, "%s\n", str);
fclose(fd);
}
int main() {
arguments[0] = (char*)"python";
arguments[1] = rfcommPath;
arguments[2] = NULL;
pid_t pid = fork();
if(pid < 0) {
printf("Fork failed");
exit(1);
} else if(pid > 0) {
exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
}
umask(0);
pid_t sid = setsid();
if(sid < 0) {
logToFile("setsid() didn't work.");
exit(1);
}
if ((chdir("/")) < 0) {
logToFile("chdir() didn't work.");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
close(STDIN_FILENO);
close(STDOUT_FILENO);
close(STDERR_FILENO);
doWork();
}
void doWork() {
pid_t pid = fork();
if(pid < 0) {
logToFile("doWork() fork didn't work.");
} else if(pid > 0) {
int status = 0;
waitpid(pid, &status, 0);
if(WEXITSTATUS(status) == 1) {
logToFile("Child process exited with an error.");
}
} else {
int error = execvp(arguments[0], arguments); //Here is where the error is
if(error == -1) {
logToFile("execvp() failed.");
}
exit(1);
}
}
Python script (AKA RFCOMMOut.py)
import RPi.GPIO as gpio
import serial
led_state = 0
led_pin = 11
gpio.setmode(gpio.BOARD)
gpio.setwarnings(False)
gpio.setup(led_pin, gpio.OUT)
try:
ser = serial.Serial(port = '/dev/rfcomm0',
baudrate = 9600,
parity = serial.PARITY_NONE,
stopbits = serial.STOPBITS_ONE,
bytesize = serial.EIGHTBITS)
except IOException as e:
logFile = open("/home/BluetoothProject/Logs/fileMonitorLogs.txt", "a")
logFile.write("(First error handler) There was an exception:\n")
logFile.write(str(e))
logFile.write("\n")
logFile.close()
#gpio.output
def process_input(input):
global led_state
if input == "I have been sent.\n":
if led_state == 1:
led_state = 0
gpio.output(led_pin, led_state)
else:
led_state = 1
gpio.output(led_pin, led_state)
while True:
try:
transmission = ser.readline()
process_input(transmission)
except IOError as e:
logFile = open("/home/BluetoothProject/Logs/fileMonitorLogs.txt", "a")
logFile.write("(second error handler) There was an exception:\n")
logFile.write(str(e))
logFile.write("\n")
logFile.close()
break
led_state = 0
gpio.output(led_pin, led_state)
gpio.cleanup()
print("End of program\n")

The question is a little unclear, so I'll try to take a few different educated guesses at what the problem is and address each one individually.
TL;DR: Remove close(STDOUT_FILENO) and close(STDERR_FILENO) to get more debugging information which will hopefully point you in the right direction.
execvp(3) is returning -1
According to the execvp(3) documentation, execvp(3) sets errno when it fails. In order to understand why it is failing, your program will need to output the value of errno somewhere; perhaps stdout, stderr, or your log file. A convenient way to do this is to use perror(3). For example:
#include <stdio.h>
...
void doWork() {
...
} else {
int error = execvp(arguments[0], arguments);
if(error == -1) {
perror("execvp() failed");
}
}
...
}
Without knowing what that errno value is, it will be difficult to identify why execvp(3) is failing.
execvp(3) is succeeding, but my Python program doesn't appear run
execvp(3) succeeding means that the Python interpreter has successfully been invoked (assuming that there is no program in your PATH that is named "python", but is not actually a Python interpreter). If your program doesn't appear to be running, that means Python is having difficulty loading your program. To my knowledge, Python will always output relevant error messages in this situation to stderr; for example, if Python cannot find your program, it will output "No such file or directory" to stderr.
However, it looks like your C program is calling close(STDERR_FILENO) before calling doWork(). According to fork(2), child processes inherit copies of their parent's set of open file descriptors. This means that calling close(STDERR_FILENO) before forking will result in the child process not having an open stderr file descriptor. If Python is having any errors executing your program, you'll never know, since Python is trying to notify you through a file descriptor that doesn't exist. If execvp(3) is succeeding and the Python program appears to not run at all, then I recommend you remove close(STDERR_FILENO) from your C program and run everything again. Without seeing the error message output by Python, it will be difficult to identify why it is failing to run the Python program.
As an aside, I recommend against explicitly closing stdin, stdout, and stderr. According to stdin(3), the standard streams are closed by a call to exit(3) and by normal program termination.
execvp(3) is succeeding, my Python program is running, but my Python program exits before it does any useful work
In this case, I'm not sure what the problem might be, since I'm not very familiar with Raspberry Pi. But I think you'll have an easier time debugging if you don't close the standard streams before running the Python program.
Hope this helps.

Executing many sub processes in groovy fails

I need to create a script that calls an application (c++ binary) 4000 times. The application takes some arguments and for each call writes a zip file to disk. So when the script is executed 4000 zip files will be written to disk. The application supports multiple threads.
I first created a bash script that does the job and it works fine. But now I need the script to be platform independent. I have therefore tried to port the script to groovy, something like this:
for (int i = 1; i <= 4000; i++) {
def command = """myExecutable
a=$argA
b=$outDir"""
def proc = command.execute() // Call *execute* on the string
proc.waitFor() // Wait for the command to finish
// Obtain status and output
println "return code: ${ proc.exitValue()}"
println "stderr: ${proc.err.text}"
println "stdout: ${proc.in.text}" // *out* from the external program is *in* for groovy
println "iteration : " + i
}
But after 381 zipfiles have been written to disk the script just hangs. Do I need to close the process after each call or something similar?
Here:
http://groovy.codehaus.org/Process+Management
it says that its known that java.lang.Process might hang or deadlock. Is it no-go to do something like this in groovy?
I will also give it at try in python to see if it gives the same problems

It might be the output stream blocking:
(1..<4000).each { i ->
println "iteration : $i"
def command = """myExecutable
a=$argA
b=$outDir"""
def proc = command.execute()
// Consume the outputs from the process and pipe them to our output streams
proc.consumeProcessOutput( System.out, System.err )
// Wait for the command to finish
proc.waitFor()
// Obtain status
println "return code: ${proc.exitValue()}"
}

Yes, you should close streams belongs to process.
Or, as say #tim_yates you shoul use consumeProcessOutput, or, in concurent solution, waitForProcessOutput, which closes them for you.
For parallel computation you could use smth. like this:
import groovyx.gpars.GParsPool
GParsPool.withPool(8){ // Start in pool with 8 threads.
(1..4000).toList().eachParallel {
def p = "myExecutable a=$argA b=$outDir".execute()
def sout = new StringBuffer();
def serr = new StringBuffer();
p.waitForProcessOutput(sout, serr)
synchronized (System.out) {
println "return code: ${ p.exitValue()}"
println "stderr: $serr"
println "stdout: $sout"
println "iteration $it"
}
}
}

NSTask requires flush when reading from a process' stdout, Terminal does not

I have a simple Python script that asks for your name, then spits it back out:
def main():
print('Enter your name: ')
for line in sys.stdin:
print 'You entered: ' + line
Pretty simple stuff! When running this in the OS X Terminal, it works great:
$ python nameTest.py
Enter your name:
Craig^D
You entered: Craig
But, when attempting to run this process via an NSTask, the stdout only appears if additional flush() calls are added to the Python script.
This is how I have my NSTask and piping configured:
NSTask *_currentTask = [[NSTask alloc] init];
_currentTask.launchPath = #"/usr/bin/python";
_currentTask.arguments = [NSArray arrayWithObject:#"nameTest.py"];
NSPipe *pipe = [[NSPipe alloc] init];
_currentTask.standardOutput = pipe;
_currentTask.standardError = pipe;
dispatch_queue_t stdout_queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_BACKGROUND, 0);
__block dispatch_block_t checkBlock;
checkBlock = ^{
NSData *readData = [[pipe fileHandleForReading] availableData];
NSString *consoleOutput = [[NSString alloc] initWithData:readData encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding];
dispatch_sync(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
[self.consoleView appendString:consoleOutput];
});
if ([_currentTask isRunning]) {
[NSThread sleepForTimeInterval:0.1];
checkBlock();
} else {
dispatch_sync(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
NSData *readData = [[pipe fileHandleForReading] readDataToEndOfFile];
NSString *consoleOutput = [[NSString alloc] initWithData:readData encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding];
[self.consoleView appendString:consoleOutput];
});
}
};
dispatch_async(stdout_queue, checkBlock);
[_currentTask launch];
But when running the NSTask, this is how it appears (it is initially blank, but after entering my name and pressing CTRL+D, it finishes all at once):
Craig^DEnter your name:
You entered: Craig
So, my question is: How can I read the stdout from my NSTask without requiring the additional flush() statements in my Python script? Why does the Enter your name: prompt not appear immediately when run as an NSTask?

When Python sees that its standard output is a terminal, it arranges to automatically flush sys.stdout when the script reads from sys.stdin. When you run the script using NSTask, the script's standard output is a pipe, not a terminal.
UPDATE
There is a Python-specific solution to this. You can pass the -u flag to the Python interpreter (e.g. _currentTask.arguments = #[ #"-u", #"nameTest.py"];), which tells Python not to buffer standard input, standard output, or standard error at all. You can also set PYTHONUNBUFFERED=1 in the process's environment to achieve the same effect.
ORIGINAL
A more general solution that applies to any program uses what's called a “pseudo-terminal” (or, historically, a “pseudo-teletype”), which we shorten to just “pty”. (In fact, this is what the Terminal app itself does. It is a rare Mac that has a physical terminal or teletype connected to a serial port!)
Each pty is actually a pair of virtual devices: a slave device and a master device. The bytes you write to the master, you can read from the slave, and vice versa. So these devices are more like sockets (which are bidirectional) than like pipes (which are one-directional). In addition, a pty also let you set terminal I/O flags (or “termios”) that control whether the slave echoes its input, whether it passes on its input a line at a time or a character at a time, and more.
Anyway, you can open a master/slave pair easily with the openpty function. Here's a little category that you can use to make an NSTask object use the slave side for the task's standard input and output.
NSTask+PTY.h
#interface NSTask (PTY)
- (NSFileHandle *)masterSideOfPTYOrError:(NSError **)error;
#end
NSTask+PTY.m
#import "NSTask+PTY.h"
#import <util.h>
#implementation NSTask (PTY)
- (NSFileHandle *)masterSideOfPTYOrError:(NSError *__autoreleasing *)error {
int fdMaster, fdSlave;
int rc = openpty(&fdMaster, &fdSlave, NULL, NULL, NULL);
if (rc != 0) {
if (error) {
*error = [NSError errorWithDomain:NSPOSIXErrorDomain code:errno userInfo:nil];
}
return NULL;
}
fcntl(fdMaster, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC);
fcntl(fdSlave, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC);
NSFileHandle *masterHandle = [[NSFileHandle alloc] initWithFileDescriptor:fdMaster closeOnDealloc:YES];
NSFileHandle *slaveHandle = [[NSFileHandle alloc] initWithFileDescriptor:fdSlave closeOnDealloc:YES];
self.standardInput = slaveHandle;
self.standardOutput = slaveHandle;
return masterHandle;
}
#end
You can use it like this:
NSTask *_currentTask = [[NSTask alloc] init];
_currentTask.launchPath = #"/usr/bin/python";
_currentTask.arguments = #[[[NSBundle mainBundle] pathForResource:#"nameTest" ofType:#"py"]];
NSError *error;
NSFileHandle *masterHandle = [_currentTask masterSideOfPTYOrError:&error];
if (!masterHandle) {
NSLog(#"error: could not set up PTY for task: %#", error);
return;
}
Then you can read from the task and write to the task using masterHandle.