Re: subprocess.Popen zombie

References	<mailman.170.1432127818.17265.python-list@python.org> <87bnhfqmr4.fsf@universite-de-strasbourg.fr.invalid> <mailman.177.1432140299.17265.python-list@python.org> <mjjuc5$1ft$1@r01.glglgl.de>
Date	2015-05-21 08:13 -0600
Subject	Re: subprocess.Popen zombie
From	Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.199.1432217627.17265.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On May 21, 2015 12:41 AM, "Thomas Rachel" <
nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> wrote:
>
> Am 20.05.2015 um 18:44 schrieb Robin Becker:
>
>> not really, it's just normal to keep event routines short; the routine
>> which beeps is after detection of the cat's entrance into the house and
>> various recognition schemes have pronounced intruder :)
>
>
> You could add a timed "cleanup" routine which .wait()s after a certain
time (250 ms or so).
>
> Or even better, which .poll()s and re-schedules itself if the process
still runs.

Or just:

    Thread(target=p.wait).start()

And then you can forget all about it.

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

subprocess.Popen zombie Robin Becker <robin@reportlab.com> - 2015-05-20 14:16 +0100
  Re: subprocess.Popen zombie Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2015-05-20 16:48 +0200
  Re: subprocess.Popen zombie Alain Ketterlin <alain@universite-de-strasbourg.fr.invalid> - 2015-05-20 17:42 +0200
    Re: subprocess.Popen zombie Robin Becker <robin@reportlab.com> - 2015-05-20 17:44 +0100
      Re: subprocess.Popen zombie Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2015-05-21 08:35 +0200
        Re: subprocess.Popen zombie Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-05-21 08:13 -0600

csiph-web