Capturing *all* terminal output of a program called from Python - python

I have a program which can be execute as
./install.sh
This install bunch of stuff and has quite a lot of activity happening on screen..
Now, I am trying to execute it via
p = subprocess.Popen(executable, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
out, err = p.communicate()
With the hope that all the activity happening on the screen is captured in out (or err). However, content is printed directly to the terminal while the process is running, and not captured into out or err, which are both empty after the process is run.
What could be happening here? How can this content be captured?

In general, what you're doing is already sufficient to channel all output to your variables.
One exception to that is if the program you're running is using /dev/tty to connect directly to its controlling terminal, and emitting output through that terminal rather than through stdout (FD 1) and stderr (FD 2). This is commonly done for security-sensitive IO such as password prompts, but rarely seen otherwise.
As a demonstration that this works, you can copy-and-paste the following into a Python shell exactly as given:
import subprocess
executable = ['/bin/sh', '-c', 'echo stdout; echo stderr >&2']
p = subprocess.Popen(executable, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
out, err = p.communicate()
print "---"
print "output: ", out
print "stderr: ", err
...by contrast, for a demonstration of the case that doesn't work:
import subprocess
executable = ['/bin/sh', '-c', 'echo uncapturable >/dev/tty']
p = subprocess.Popen(executable, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
out, err = p.communicate()
print "---"
print "output: ", out
In this case, content is written to the TTY directly, not to stdout or stderr. This content cannot be captured without using a program (such as script or expect) that provides a fake TTY. So, to use script:
import subprocess
executable = ['script', '-q', '/dev/null',
'/bin/sh', '-c', 'echo uncapturable >/dev/tty']
p = subprocess.Popen(executable, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
out, err = p.communicate()
print "---"
print "output: ", out

Related

Subprocess.Popen spits output on screen even with stdout=subprocess.PIPE)

I'm using multiple commands to run:
e.g. cd foo/bar; ../../run_this -arg1 -arg2="yeah_ more arg1 arg2" arg3=/my/path finalarg
Running with:
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
(out, err) = p.communicate()
But this spits output on screen (Python 2.7.5)
And out is empty string.
You have shell=True, so you're basically reading the standard output of the shell spawned, not the standard output of the program you want to run.
I'm guessing you're using shell=True to accommodate the directory changing. Fortunately, subprocess can take care of that for you (by passing a directory via the cwd keyword argument):
import subprocess
import shlex
directory = 'foo/bar'
cmd = '../../run_this -arg1 -arg2="yeah_ more arg1 arg2" arg3=/my/path finalarg'
p = subprocess.Popen(shlex.split(cmd), cwd=directory, stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
(out, err) = p.communicate()
As per comment I added stderr too and that worked!:
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE,stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)

subprocess.communicate on perf stat does not return expected stdout, stderr

I was trying to run perf stat within Python using subprocess.
I noticed a behavior which I think is curious, this is the code:
import subprocess
cmd="perf stat -e cache-misses echo stdout"
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd,shell=True,stdout=subprocess.PIPE,stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
out,err = p.communicate()
print "OUT",out
print "ERR",err
And this is the output:
Performance counter stats for 'echo stdout':
1,759 cache-misses
0.000868593 seconds time elapsed
OUT stdout
ERR
The output of the command which is profiled by perf is correctly returned as stdout. The stats from perf should be returned on the stderr, instead they are printed on screen instead of saved in the err variable after the communicate.
I also tried to remove the shell=True but it does not change the result.
Why does this happen?
I tried the following on Ubuntu 14.10 and it seems to work. The output will be in stderr_output:
import subprocess
if __name__ == '__main__':
cmd = ['perf', 'stat', '-x,', '-e', 'cache-misses', 'echo', 'stdout']
print 'cmd:', cmd
process = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
stdout_output, stderr_output = process.communicate()
print "\nOutput:"
print stdout_output,
print '\nError:'
print stderr_output
Discussion
I splitted the command into a list and it works, leave it as one string and it doesn't
I did not have to use shell=True
If you don't want the machine-readable output, remove the -x, option

python subprocess is working in interactive mode but in not script

In windows I have to execute a command like below:
process = subprocess.Popen([r'C:\Program Files (x86)\xxx\xxx.exe', '-n', '#iseasn2a7.sd.xxxx.com:3944#dc', '-d', r'D:\test\file.txt'], shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
process.communicate()
This works fine in python interactive mode, but not at all executing from the python script.
What may be the issue ?
Popen.communicate itself does not print anything, but it returns the stdout, stderr output. Beside that because the code specified stdout=PIPE, stderr=... when it create Popen, it catch the outputs (does not let the sub-process print output directly to the stdout of the parent process)
You need to print the return value manually:
process = ....
output, error = process.communicate()
print output
If you don't want that, don't catch stdout output by omit stdout=PIPE, stderr=....
Then, you don't need to use communicate, but just wait:
process = subprocess.Popen([...], shell=True)
process.wait()
Or, you can use subprocess.call which both execute sub-process and wait its termination:
subprocess.call([...], shell=True)

Failing to capture stdout from application

I have the following script:
import subprocess
arguments = ["d:\\simulator","2332.txt","2332.log", "-c"]
output=subprocess.Popen(arguments, stdout=subprocess.PIPE).communicate()[0]
print(output)
which gives me b'' as output.
I also tried this script:
import subprocess
arguments = ["d:\\simulator","2332.txt","atp2332.log", "-c"]
process = subprocess.Popen(arguments,stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
process.wait()
print(process.stdout.read())
print("ERROR:" + str(process.stderr))
which gives me the output: b'', ERROR:None
However when I run this at the cmd prompt I get a 5 lines of text.
d:\simulator atp2332.txt atp2332.log -c
I have added to simulator a message box which pops up when it launches. This is presented for all three cases. So I know that I sucessfully launch the simulator. However the python scripts are not caturing the stdout.
What am I doing wrong?
Barry.
If possible (not endless stream of data) you should use communicate() as noted on the page.
Try this:
import subprocess
arguments = ["d:\\simulator","2332.txt","atp2332.log", "-c"]
process = subprocess.Popen(arguments, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
sout, serr = process.communicate()
print(sout)
print(serr)
The following code gives me text output on stdout.
Perhaps you could try it, and then substitute your command for help
import subprocess
arguments = ["help","2332.txt","atp2332.log", "-c"]
process = subprocess.Popen(arguments,stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
process.wait()
print 'Return code', process.returncode
print('stdout:', process.stdout.read())
print("stderr:" + process.stderr.read())

catching stdout in realtime from subprocess

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

Categories

Resources