Background: I have a Python subprocess that connects to a shell-like application, which uses the readline library to handle input, and that app has a TAB-complete routine for command input, just like bash. The child process is spawned, like so:
def get_cli_subprocess_handle():
return subprocess.Popen(
'/bin/myshell',
shell=False,
stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.STDOUT,
)
Everything works great, except tab-complete. Whenever my Python program passes the tab character, '\t' to the subprocess, I get 5 spaces in the STDIN, instead of triggering the readline library's tab-complete routine. :(
Question: What can I send to the subprocess's STDIN to trigger the child's tab-complete function? Maybe asked another way: How do I send the TAB key as opposed to the TAB character, if that is even possible?
Related but Unanswered and Derailed:
trigger tab completion for python batch process built around readline
The shell like application is probably differentiating between a terminal being connected to stdin and a pipe being connected to it. Many Unix utilities do just that to optimise their buffering (line vs. block) and shell-like utilities are likely to disable command completion facilities on batch input (i.e. PIPE) to avoid unexpected results. Command completion is really an interactive feature which requires a terminal input.
Check out the pty module and try using a master/slave pair as the pipe for your subprocess.
There really is no such thing as sending a tab key to a pipe. A pipe can only accept strings of bits, and if the tab character isn't doing it, there may not be a solution.
There is a project that does something similar called pexpect. Just looking at its interact() code, I'm not seeing anything obvious that makes it work and yours not. Given that, the most likely explanation is that pexpect actually does some work to make itself look like a pseudo-terminal. Perhaps you could incorporate its code for that?
Based on isedev's answer, I modified my code as follows:
import os, pty
def get_cli_subprocess_handle():
masterPTY, slaveTTY = pty.openpty()
return masterPTY, slaveTTY, subprocess.Popen(
'/bin/myshell',
shell=False,
stdin=slaveTTY,
stdout=slaveTTY,
stderr=slaveTTY,
)
Using this returned tuple, I was able to perform select.select([masterPTY],[],[]) and os.read(masterPTY, 1024) as needed, and I wrote to the master-pty with a function that is very similar to a private method in the pty module source:
def write_all(masterPTY, data):
"""Successively write all of data into a file-descriptor."""
while data:
chars_written = os.write(masterPTY, data)
data = data[chars_written:]
return data
Thanks to all for the good solutions. Hope this example helps someone else. :)
Related
I just want to build a little python music client on my raspberry pi. I installed "mpg321" and it works great but now my problem. After sending the command
os.system("mpg321 -R testPlayer")
python waits for user input like play, pause or quit. If I write this in my terminal the player pause the music oder quits. Perfect but I want python to do that so I send the command
os.system("LOAD test.mp3")
where LOAD is the command for loading this mp3. But nothing happens. When I quit the player via terminal I get the error:
sh: 1: LOAD: not found
I think this means that
os.system("mpg321 -R testPlayer")
takes the whole process and after I quit it python tries to execute the comman LOAD. So how do I get these things work together?
My code:
import os
class PyMusic:
def __init__(self):
print "initial stuff later"
def playFile(self, fileName, directory = ""):
os.system("mpg321 -R testPlayer")
os.system("LOAD test.mp3")
if __name__ == "__main__":
pymusic = PyMusic()
pymusic.playFile("test.mp3")
Thanks for your help!
First, you should almost never be using os.system. See the subprocess module.
One major advantage of using subprocess is that you can choose whatever behavior you want—run it in the background, start it and wait for it to finish (and throw an exception if it returns non-zero), interact with its stdin and stdout explicitly, whatever makes sense.
Here, you're not trying to run another command "LOAD test.mp3", you're trying to pass that as input to the existing process. So:
p = subprocess.Popen(['mpg321', '-R', 'testPlayer'], stdin=PIPE)
Then you can do this:
p.stdin.write('LOAD test.mp3\n')
This is roughly equivalent to doing this from the shell:
echo -e 'LOAD test.mp3\n' | mpg321 -R testPlayer
However, you should probably read about communicate, because whenever it's possible to figure out how to make your code work with communicate, it's a lot simpler than trying to deal with generic I/O (especially if you've never coded with pipes, sockets, etc. before).
Or, if you're trying to interact with a command-line UI (e.g., you can't send the command until you get the right prompt), you may want to look at an "expect" library. There are a few of these to choose from, so you should search at PyPI to find the right one for you (although I can say that I've used pexpect successfully in the past, and the documentation is full of samples that get the ideas across a lot more quickly than most expect documentation does).
You are looking for a way to send data to stdin. Here is an example of this using Popen:
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE, STDOUT
p = Popen(['mpg321', '-R testPlayer'], stdout=PIPE, stdin=PIPE, stderr=STDOUT)
mpg123_stdout = p.communicate(input='LOAD test.mp3\n')[0]
print(mpg123_stdout)
You establish pointers to stdin and stdout, then after you start your process, you communicate with stdin and read from stdout. Be sure to send new lines (carriage returns)
I have an app that reads in stuff from stdin and returns, after a newline, results to stdout
A simple (stupid) example:
$ app
Expand[(x+1)^2]<CR>
x^2 + 2*x + 1
100 - 4<CR>
96
Opening and closing the app requires a lot of initialization and clean-up (its an interface to a Computer Algebra System), so I want to keep this to a minimum.
I want to open a pipe in Python to this process, write strings to its stdin and read out the results from stdout. Popen.communicate() doesn't work for this, as it closes the file handle, requiring to reopen the pipe.
I've tried something along the lines of this related question:
Communicate multiple times with a process without breaking the pipe? but I'm not sure how to wait for the output. It is also difficult to know a priori how long it will take the app to finish to process for the input at hand, so I don't want to make any assumptions. I guess most of my confusion comes from this question: Non-blocking read on a subprocess.PIPE in python where it is stated that mixing high and low level functions is not a good idea.
EDIT:
Sorry that I didn't give any code before, got interrupted. This is what I've tried so far and it seems to work, I'm just worried that something goes wrong unnoticed:
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
pipe = Popen(["MathPipe"], stdin=PIPE, stdout=PIPE)
expressions = ["Expand[(x+1)^2]", "Integrate[Sin[x], {x,0,2*Pi}]"] # ...
for expr in expressions:
pipe.stdin.write(expr)
while True:
line = pipe.stdout.readline()
if line != '':
print line
# output of MathPipe is always terminated by ';'
if ";" in line:
break
Potential problems with this?
Using subprocess, you can't do this reliably. You might want to look at using the pexpect library. That won't work on Windows - if you're on Windows, try winpexpect.
Also, if you're trying to do mathematical stuff in Python, check out SAGE. They do a lot of work on interfacing with other open-source maths software, so there's a chance they've already done what you're trying to.
Perhaps you could pass stdin=subprocess.PIPE as an argument to subprocess.Popen. This will make the process' stdin available as a general file-like object:
import sys, subprocess
proc = subprocess.Popen(["mathematica <args>"], stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
stdout=sys.stdout, shell=True)
proc.stdin.write("Expand[ (x-1)^2 ]") # Write whatever to the process
proc.stdin.flush() # Ensure nothing is left in the buffer
proc.terminate() # Kill the process
This directs the subprocess' output directly to your python process' stdout. If you need to read the output and do some editing first, that is possible as well. Check out http://docs.python.org/library/subprocess.html#popen-objects.
Again, the same question.
The reason is - I still can't make it work after reading the following:
Real-time intercepting of stdout from another process in Python
Intercepting stdout of a subprocess while it is running
How do I get 'real-time' information back from a subprocess.Popen in python (2.5)
catching stdout in realtime from subprocess
My case is that I have a console app written in C, lets take for example this code in a loop:
tmp = 0.0;
printf("\ninput>>");
scanf_s("%f",&tmp);
printf ("\ninput was: %f",tmp);
It continuously reads some input and writes some output.
My python code to interact with it is the following:
p=subprocess.Popen([path],stdout=subprocess.PIPE,stdin=subprocess.PIPE)
p.stdin.write('12345\n')
for line in p.stdout:
print(">>> " + str(line.rstrip()))
p.stdout.flush()
So far whenever I read form p.stdout it always waits until the process is terminated and then outputs an empty string. I've tried lots of stuff - but still the same result.
I tried Python 2.6 and 3.1, but the version doesn't matter - I just need to make it work somewhere.
Trying to write to and read from pipes to a sub-process is tricky because of the default buffering going on in both directions. It's extremely easy to get a deadlock where one or the other process (parent or child) is reading from an empty buffer, writing into a full buffer or doing a blocking read on a buffer that's awaiting data before the system libraries flush it.
For more modest amounts of data the Popen.communicate() method might be sufficient. However, for data that exceeds its buffering you'd probably get stalled processes (similar to what you're already seeing?)
You might want to look for details on using the fcntl module and making one or the other (or both) of your file descriptors non-blocking. In that case, of course, you'll have to wrap all reads and/or writes to those file descriptors in the appropriate exception handling to handle the "EWOULDBLOCK" events. (I don't remember the exact Python exception that's raised for these).
A completely different approach would be for your parent to use the select module and os.fork() ... and for the child process to execve() the target program after directly handling any file dup()ing. (Basically you'd be re-implement parts of Popen() but with different parent file descriptor (PIPE) handling.
Incidentally, .communicate, at least in Python's 2.5 and 2.6 standard libraries, will only handle about 64K of remote data (on Linux and FreeBSD). This number may vary based on various factors (possibly including the build options used to compile your Python interpreter, or the version of libc being linked to it). It is NOT simply limited by available memory (despite J.F. Sebastian's assertion to the contrary) but is limited to a much smaller value.
Push reading from the pipe into a separate thread that signals when a chunk of output is available:
How can I read all availably data from subprocess.Popen.stdout (non blocking)?
The bufsize=256 argument prevents 12345\n from being sent to the child process in a chunk smaller than 256 bytes, as it will be when omitting bufsize or inserting p.stdin.flush() after p.stdin.write(). Default behaviour is line-buffering.
In either case you should at least see one empty line before blocking as emitted by the first printf(\n...) in your example.
Your particular example doesn't require "real-time" interaction. The following works:
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
p = Popen(["./a.out"], stdin=PIPE, stdout=PIPE)
output = p.communicate(b"12345")[0] # send input/read all output
print output,
where a.out is your example C program.
In general, for a dialog-based interaction with a subprocess you could use pexpect module (or its analogs on Windows):
import pexpect
child = pexpect.spawn("./a.out")
child.expect("input>>")
child.sendline("12345.67890") # send a number
child.expect(r"\d+\.\d+") # expect the number at the end
print float(child.after) # assert that we can parse it
child.close()
I had the same problem, and "proc.communicate()" does not solve it because it waits for process terminating.
So here is what is working for me, on Windows with Python 3.5.1 :
import subprocess as sp
myProcess = sp.Popen( cmd, creationflags=sp.CREATE_NEW_PROCESS_GROUP,stdout=sp.PIPE,stderr=sp.STDOUT)
while i<40:
i+=1
time.sleep(.5)
out = myProcess.stdout.readline().decode("utf-8").rstrip()
I guess creationflags and other arguments are not mandatory (but I don't have time to test), so this would be the minimal syntax :
myProcess = sp.Popen( cmd, stdout=sp.PIPE)
for i in range(40)
time.sleep(.5)
out = myProcess.stdout.readline()
I am using Python 3.0 in Windows and trying to automate the testing of a commandline application. The user can type commands in Application Under Test and it returns the output as 2 XML packets. One is a packet and the other one is an packet. By analyzing these packets I can verifyt he result. I ahev the code as below
p = subprocess.Popen(SomeCmdAppl, stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
shell = True, stdin=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
p.stdin.write((command + '\r\n').encode())
time.sleep(2.5)
testresult = p.stdout.readline()
testresult = testresult.decode()
print(testresult)
I cannot ge any output back. It get stuck in place where I try to read the output by using readline(). I tried read() and it get stuck too
When I run the commandline application manually and type the command I get the output back correctly as tow xml packets as below
Sent: <PivotNetMessage>
<MessageId>16f8addf-d366-4031-b3d3-5593efb9f7dd</MessageId>
<ConversationId>373323be-31dd-4858-a7f9-37d97e36eb36</ConversationId>
<SageId>4e1e7c04-4cea-49b2-8af1-64d0f348e621</SagaId>
<SourcePath>C:\Python30\PyNTEST</SourcePath>
<Command>echo</Command>
<Content>Hello</Content>
<Time>7/4/2009 11:16:41 PM</Time>
<ErrorCode>0</ErrorCode>
<ErrorInfo></ErrorInfo>
</PivotNetMessagSent>
Recv: <PivotNetMessage>
<MessageId>16f8addf-d366-4031-b3d3-5593efb9f7dd</MessageId>
<ConversationId>373323be-31dd-4858-a7f9-37d97e36eb36</ConversationId>
<SageId>4e1e7c04-4cea-49b2-8af1-64d0f348e621</SagaId>
<SourcePath>C:\PivotNet\Endpoints\Pipeline\Pipeline_2.0.0.202</SourcePath>
<Command>echo</Command>
<Content>Hello</Content>
<Time>7/4/2009 11:16:41 PM</Time>
<ErrorCode>0</ErrorCode>
<ErrorInfo></ErrorInfo>
</PivotNetMessage>
But when I use the communicate() as below I get the Sent packet and never get the Recv: packet. Why am I missing the recv packet? The communicate(0 is supposed to bring everything from stdout. rt?
p = subprocess.Popen(SomeCmdAppl, stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
shell = True, stdin=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
p.stdin.write((command + '\r\n').encode())
time.sleep(2.5)
result = p.communicate()[0]
print(result)
Can anybody help me with a sample code that should work? I don't know if it is needed to read and write in separate threads. Please help me. I need to do repeated read/write. Is there any advanced level module in python i can use. I think Pexpect module doesn't work in Windows
This is a popular problem, e.g. see:
Interact with a Windows console application via Python
How do I get 'real-time' information back from a subprocess.Popen in python (2.5)
how do I read everything currently in a subprocess.stdout pipe and then return?
(Actually, you should have seen these during creation of your question...?!).
I have two things of interest:
p.stdin.write((command + '\r\n').encode()) is also buffered so your child process might not even have seen its input. You can try flushing this pipe.
In one of the other questions one suggested doing a stdout.read() on the child instead of readline(), with a suitable amount of characters to read. You might want to experiment with this.
Post your results.
Try sending your input using communicate instead of using write:
result = p.communicate((command + '\r\n').encode())[0]
Have you considered using pexpect instead of subprocess? It handles the details which are probably preventing your code from working (like flushing buffers, etc). It may not be available for Py3k yet, but it works well in 2.x.
See: http://pexpect.sourceforge.net/pexpect.html
I want to spawn (fork?) multiple Python scripts from my program (written in Python as well).
My problem is that I want to dedicate one terminal to each script, because I'll gather their output using pexpect.
I've tried using pexpect, os.execlp, and os.forkpty but neither of them do as I expect.
I want to spawn the child processes and forget about them (they will process some data, write the output to the terminal which I could read with pexpect and then exit).
Is there any library/best practice/etc. to accomplish this job?
p.s. Before you ask why I would write to STDOUT and read from it, I shall say that I don't write to STDOUT, I read the output of tshark.
See the subprocess module
The subprocess module allows you to spawn new processes, connect to their input/output/error pipes, and obtain their return codes. This module intends to replace several other, older modules and functions, such as:
os.system
os.spawn*
os.popen*
popen2.*
commands.*
From Python 3.5 onwards you can do:
import subprocess
result = subprocess.run(['python', 'my_script.py', '--arg1', val1])
if result.returncode != 0:
print('script returned error')
This also automatically redirects stdout and stderr.
I don't understand why you need expect for this. tshark should send its output to stdout, and only for some strange reason would it send it to stderr.
Therefore, what you want should be:
import subprocess
fp= subprocess.Popen( ("/usr/bin/tshark", "option1", "option2"), stdout=subprocess.PIPE).stdout
# now, whenever you are ready, read stuff from fp
You want to dedicate one terminal or one python shell?
You already have some useful answers for Popen and Subprocess, you could also use pexpect if you're already planning on using it anyways.
#for multiple python shells
import pexpect
#make your commands however you want them, this is just one method
mycommand1 = "print 'hello first python shell'"
mycommand2 = "print 'this is my second shell'"
#add a "for" statement if you want
child1 = pexpect.spawn('python')
child1.sendline(mycommand1)
child2 = pexpect.spawn('python')
child2.sendline(mycommand2)
Make as many children/shells as you want and then use the child.before() or child.after() to get your responses.
Of course you would want to add definitions or classes to be sent instead of "mycommand1", but this is just a simple example.
If you wanted to make a bunch of terminals in linux, you just need to replace the 'python' in the pextpext.spawn line
Note: I haven't tested the above code. I'm just replying from past experience with pexpect.