I'm trying to write a python script that can make my computer associate to a wireless access point, given the name as a string. For example, I might specify I want to connect to linksys, and my script would cause the computer to do that.
I looked at this question, but wasn't able to understand what to do from looking at the links provided.
Can somebody point me in the right direction?
I decided to take Paulo's suggestion and try using Powershell/the command line. I found an article about connecting to a network via the command line.
From the command line, you can do:
netsh wlan connect <profile-name> [name=<ssid-name>]
...where the name=<ssid-name> part is optional and is necessarily only if the profile contains multiple ssids.
However, it looks like the profile must already exist on the machine in order for the command line stuff to work. I did find a forum post on programatically creating a profile, but I didn't feel like canvassing through it.
If the profile name already exists, then from Python you can do something similar to the following:
import subprocess
def connect_to_network(name):
process = subprocess.Popen(
'netsh wlan connect {0}'.format(name),
shell=True,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
stdout, stderr = process.communicate()
# Return `True` if we were able to successfully connect
return 'Connection request was completed successfully' in stdout
It's an imperfect solution, and I'm not entirely sure if it'll work in every case, but it did work for my particular case. I thought I'd post what I came up with in case somebody else wants to try modifying it to make it better.
The answer you linked talks about calling low level C functions from the Windows API. Fiddling with low level stuff makes my brain hurt.
There is a .Net wrapper around the native C calls, you can use this higher level API directly from IronPython. Unfortunately it is not well documented, but looking at the C# sample and digging over the sources should be easier than calling the underlying API. This is a very windows-centric solution, so you may be better served by powershell.
I've written a Python CLI tool for controlling Wi-Fi over command line interface. There's a library in this project, and it should fit your requirement.
https://github.com/changyuheng/pywinwifi
There's another standalone library but I've never tried it.
https://github.com/reedcourty/pynetsh
Related
I created the simple python script using pexpect, created one spwan process using
CurrentCommand = "ssh " + serverRootUserName + "#" + serverHostName
child = pexpect.spawn(CurrentCommand)
Now I am running some command like ls-a or "find /opt/license/ -name '*.xml'"
using code
child.run(mycommand)
it works fine if running from Pycharm but if running from terminal it is not working it is not able to find any file, I think it is looking into my local system.
Can anyone suggest me something. Thanks
As a suggestion, have a look at the paramiko library (or fabric, which uses it, but has a specific purpose), as this is a python interface to ssh. It might make your code a bit better and more resilient against bugs or attacks.
However, I think the issue comes from your use of run.
This function runs the given command; waits for it to finish; then returns all output as a string. STDERR is included in output. If the full path to the command is not given then the path is searched.
What you should look at is 'expect'. I.e. your spawn with spawn then you should use expect to wait for that to get to an appropiate point (such as connected, terminal ready after motd pushed etc (because ouy might have to put a username and password in etc).
Then you want to run sendline to send a line to the program. See the example:
http://pexpect.readthedocs.io/en/latest/overview.html
Hope that helps, and seriously, have a look at paramiko ;)
Per Python documentation, subprocess.call should be blocking and wait for the subprocess to complete. In this code I am trying to convert few xls files to a new format by calling Libreoffice on command line. I assumed that the call to subprocess call is blocking but seems like I need to add an artificial delay after each call otherwise I miss few files in the out directory.
what am I doing wrong? and why do I need the delay?
from subprocess import call
for i in range(0,len(sorted_files)):
args = ['libreoffice', '-headless', '-convert-to',
'xls', "%s/%s.xls" %(sorted_files[i]['filename'],sorted_files[i]['filename']), '-outdir', 'out']
call(args)
var = raw_input("Enter something: ") # if comment this line I dont get all the files in out directory
EDIT It might be hard to find the answer through the comments below. I used unoconv for document conversion which is blocking and easy to work with from an script.
It's possible likely that libreoffice is implemented as some sort of daemon/intermediary process. The "daemon" will (effectively1) parse the commandline and then farm the work off to some other process, possibly detaching them so that it can exit immediately. (based on the -invisible option in the documentation I suspect strongly that this is indeed the case you have).
If this is the case, then your subprocess.call does do what it is advertised to do -- It waits for the daemon to complete before moving on. However, it doesn't do what you want which is to wait for all of the work to be completed. The only option you have in that scenario is to look to see if the daemon has a -wait option or similar.
1It is likely that we don't have an actual daemon here, only something which behaves similarly. See comments by abernert
The problem is that the soffice command-line tool (which libreoffice is either just a link to, or a further wrapper around) is just a "controller" for the real program soffice.bin. It finds a running copy of soffice.bin and/or creates on, tells it to do some work, and then quits.
So, call is doing exactly the right thing: it waits for libreoffice to quit.
But you don't want to wait for libreoffice to quit, you want to wait for soffice.bin to finish doing the work that libreoffice asked it to do.
It looks like what you're trying to do isn't possible to do directly. But it's possible to do indirectly.
The docs say that headless mode:
… allows using the application without user interface.
This special mode can be used when the application is controlled by external clients via the API.
In other words, the app doesn't quit after running some UNO strings/doing some conversions/whatever else you specify on the command line, it sits around waiting for more UNO commands from outside, while the launcher just runs as soon as it sends the appropriate commands to the app.
You probably have to use that above-mentioned external control API (UNO) directly.
See Scripting LibreOffice for the basics (although there's more info there about internal scripting than external), and the API documentation for details and examples.
But there may be an even simpler answer: unoconv is a simple command-line tool written using the UNO API that does exactly what you want. It starts up LibreOffice if necessary, sends it some commands, waits for the results, and then quits. So if you just use unoconv instead of libreoffice, call is all you need.
Also notice that unoconv is written in Python, and is designed to be used as a module. If you just import it, you can write your own (simpler, and use-case-specific) code to replace the "Main entrance" code, and not use subprocess at all. (Or, of course, you can tear apart the module and use the relevant code yourself, or just use it as a very nice piece of sample code for using UNO from Python.)
Also, the unoconv page linked above lists a variety of other similar tools, some that work via UNO and some that don't, so if it doesn't work for you, try the others.
If nothing else works, you could consider, e.g., creating a sentinel file and using a filesystem watch, so at least you'll be able to detect exactly when it's finished its work, instead of having to guess at a timeout. But that's a real last-ditch workaround that you shouldn't even consider until eliminating all of the other options.
If libreoffice is being using an intermediary (daemon) as mentioned by #mgilson, then one solution is to find out what program it's invoking, and then directly invoke it yourself.
In Windows, that is.
I think the answer to this question is that I need to create a Windows service. This seems ludicrously heavyweight for what I am trying to do.
I'm just trying to slap together a little prototype here for my manager, I'm not going to be responsible for productizing it... in fact, it may never even BE productized; it might just be something that a few researchers play around with.
I have a CGI script that receives a file for upload, stores it to a temporary location, then launches a background process to do some serious number-crunching on the file. Then some Javascript stuff sits around calling other CGI scripts to check on the status and update the page as needed.
All of this works, except the damn web server won't close the connection as long as the subrocess is running. I've done some searching, and it appears the answer on Unix is to make it a daemon, but I'm stuck on Windows right now and I guess the answer there is to make it a Windows service?!? This seems incredibly heavyweight to just, you know, launch a damn process and then close the server connection.
That's really the only way?
Edit: Okay, found a nifty little hack over here (the choice (3) that the guy gives):
How to completely background a process in Perl CGI under IIS
I was able to modify this to make it even simpler, and although this is a klugey solution, it is perfect for the quick-and-dirty little prototype I am trying to make.
So I initially had my main script doing this:
subprocess.Popen("python.exe","myscript.py","arg1","arg2")
Which doesn't work, as I've described. Instead, I now have my main script emit this little bit of Javascript which runs after the document is fully loaded:
$("#somecrap").load("launchBackgroundProcess.py", {arg1:"foo",arg2:"bar"});
And then launchBackgroundProcess.py does the subprocess.Popen.
This solution would never scale, since it still leaves the browser connection open during the entire time the background task is running. But since this little thinger I am whipping up might someday have two simultaneous users at most (even then I doubt it) resources are not a concern. This allows the user to see the main page and get the Javascript updates even though there is still an http connection hanging open for no good reason.
Thanks for the answers! If I'm ever asked to productize this, I'll take at the resources Profane recommends.
If you haven't much experience with windows programming and don't wish to peruse the MSDN docs-- I don't blame you-- you may want to try to pick up a copy of Mark Hammond's cannonical guide to all things python and windows. It somehow never goes out-of-date on many of these sorts of recurring questions. Instead of launching the process with the every-platform solution, you'd probably be better off using the win32process module. Chapter 17 of the Hammond book covers this extensively, but you could probably get all you need by downloading the pywin ide (I think it comes bundled in the windows extensions which you can download from pypi), and looking through the help docs it has on python's windows' api. Here's an example of using the api, from a project I was working on recently. It may in fact do some of what you want with a little adaptation. You'd probably want to focus on CreationFlags. In particular, win32process.DETACHED_PROCESS is "often used to execute console programs in the background." Many other flags are available and conveniently wrapped however.
if subprocess.mswindows:
su=subprocess.STARTUPINFO()
su.dwFlags |= subprocess._subprocess.STARTF_USESHOWWINDOW
process = subprocess.Popen(['program', 'flag', 'flag2'], bufsize=-1,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE, startupinfo=su)
Simplest, but not most efficient way would be to just run another python executable
from subprocess import Popen
Popen("python somescript.py")
You can just use a system call using the "start" windows command. This way your python script will not wait for the completion of the started program.
CGI scripts are run with standard output redirected, either directly to the TCP socket or to a pipe. Typically, the connection won't close until the handle, and all copies of it, are closed. By default, the subprocess will inherit a copy of the handle.
There are two ways to prevent the connection from waiting on the subprocess. One is to prevent the subprocess from inheriting the handle, the other is for the subprocess to close its copy of the handle when it starts.
If the subprocess is in Perl, I think you could close the handle very simply:
close(STDOUT);
If you want to prevent the subprocess from inheriting the handle, you could use the SetHandleInformation function (if you have access to the Win32 API) or set bInheritHandles to FALSE in the call to CreateProcess. Alternatively, close the handle before launching the subprocess.
Imagine a web application that allows a logged in user to run a shell command on the web server at the press of a button. This is relatively simple in most languages via some standard library os tools.
But if that command is long running you don't want your UI to hang. Again this is relatively easy to deal with using some sort of background process or putting the command to be executed onto a message queue (and maybe saving the output and status somewhere for later consumption). Just return quickly saving we'll run that and get back to you.
What I'd like to do is show the output of said web ui triggered shell command as it happens. So vertically scrolling text like when running in a terminal.
I have a vague idea of how I might approach this, streaming the output to a websocket perhaps and simply printing the output to screen.
What I'd like to ask is:
Are their any plugins, libraries or applications that already do this. Something I can either use or read the source of. Ideally an open source python/django or ruby/rails tool, but other stacks would be interesting too.
I'm not sure if it's what you want, but there are some web based ssh clients out there. If you care about security and really just want dynamic feedback, you could look into comet or just have a frame with its own http session that doesn't end until it's done printing.
web-based ssh client would work, into the host (there are java ssh clients out there).
Ruby has a web-based terminal:
http://tryruby.org (link to the source is at the bottom of the page).
You could also embed Ruby via jruby: http://tim.lossen.de/2007/03/jruby/applet.html
http://github.com/jruby/jruby/blob/master/samples/irb-applet.html
I haven't heard of any libraries that do this, but you'll need to setup the system command and call out to the system. You will then need to "pump" the sysout and syserr standard inputs and pipe that data back out to your web client.
As an example for this style of problem, look into code snippits of how people use ruby/python/etc to transcode a video, i.e. http://kpumuk.info/ruby-on-rails/encoding-media-files-in-ruby-using-ffmpeg-mencoder-with-progress-tracking/ - my example was taken from this blog post.
class MediaFormatException < StandardError
end
def execute_mencoder(command)
progress = nil
IO.popen(command) do |pipe|
pipe.each("r") do |line|
if line =~ /Pos:[^(]*(s*(d+)%)/
p = $1.to_i
p = 100 if p > 100
if progress != p
progress = p
print "PROGRESS: #{progress}n"
$defout.flush
end
end
end
end
raise MediaFormatException if $?.exitstatus != 0
end
I don't know if this example is pulling data from both sysout and syserr, but you will definitely need to be pulling data from both of those interfaces, typically if the buffer fills up, the executing command might hang or fail (I have experienced this with Python). This method will also look different if the only thing you do is return line to the web client - in a terminal, the progress indicator of ffmpeg/mencoder remains stationary on the bottom line, but this method will give you a long list of progress indicator updates. Pipe line out to your terminal and you'll see what I'm referring to.
So, I've tried to answer my own question with code as I couldn't find anything to quite fit the bill. Hopefully it's useful to anyone coming across the same problem.
Redbeard 0X0A pointed me in the general direction, I was able to get a stand along ruby script doing what I wanted using popen. Extending this to using EventMachine (as it provided a convenient way of writing a websocket server) and using it's inbuilt popen method solved my problem.
More details here http://morethanseven.net/2010/09/09/Script-running-web-interface-with-websockets.html and the code at http://github.com/garethr/bolt/
Certainly not the best way to run shell commands, but likely the easiest:
#!/bin/sh
echo Content-Type: text/plain
echo
/usr/bin/uptime
http://www.sente.cc/scripts/uptime.cgi
Take a look at Galaxy (online demo) or Yabi.
Except from the requirement to be able to show output during the job run, they are both excellent solutions to this! They are also both written i Python (and Yabi even on django).
They were both built with bioinformatics in mind, but really are both general job runner/workflow tools.
They will let you specify parameters in a web interface, see queued/running/finished jobs in a separate column, and after the jobs are finished, inspect details and results, or re-run the job, with possibly changed parameters.
Galaxy is the easier one to install. The Galaxy installation boils down to downloading and run "sh run.sh"), and adding your own tool boils down to creating an XML file in the line of:
<tool id="mytool" name="My Tool" version="1.0.0">
<description>Does this and that</description>
<command>somecommand --aparam $aparam</command>
<inputs>
<param name="aparam" type="text" label="A parameter"/>
</inputs>
<outputs>
<data name="outfile" format="tabular"/>
</outputs>
</tool>
... and place it in the /tools folder, and add a line in the tool_conf.xml to tell galaxy of your new tool (There you can also get rid of the bioinformatics-tools, so they don't mess up your tools menu).
Yabi is more complicated to install (see the readme file), but the process might be smooth if you are on the right kind of system. On the other hand, it allows you even do the tool configuration in the web interface, rather than as an XML file like in Galaxy.
Galaxy still is the one with the biggest community though, which is reflected in the number of features/already integrated tools (See the toolshed for shared tools/wrapper).
websocketd looks like the perfect tool for that.
I have a Panatone Huey, a monitor calibration probe (device you attach to the monitor, and it gives you colour readings) - I want to get readings from the device in Python.
Having never written such a device driver before, I'm not sure where to start.
I've found are two open-source C/C++ projects that interface with the Heuy - ArgyllCMS and mcalib.
ArgyllCMS comes with a spotread command which returns readings from the device, although it only functions as an interactive command line tool, so running it via subprocess will not (easily) work.
The code ArgyllCMS uses to communicate with the device is in spectro/huey.c
Not tried it (only just found it while writing this question), but mcalib contains much less code, mainly just heuy.cpp - however it has a worrying number of FIXME comments and incomplete methods, and the code appears to have been automatically generated (unhelpful variable names)
There seems to be three options:
Modify spotread to work without any interactive prompts, call it via subprocess
Create a C-based Python module around huey.c or huey.cpp
Re-implement the interface using something like PyUSB
Being much more familiar with Python, I'm tempted to use PyUSB, but will this be substantially more work than wrapping existing code with the Python C API? Is there anything obvious in either of the C implementations that will not be easily doable in PyUSB?
Given the existence of spotread the easiest (though perhaps not the best) way to proceed would be to use pexpect. It allows you to interact with other command-line programs.