Re: subprocess.Popen and thread module

From	Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com>
Subject	Re: subprocess.Popen and thread module
Date	2011-08-11 09:15 +0100
Message-Id	<pan.2011.08.11.08.15.12.752000@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
References	<20110808013500.7c9e30ff44caee0f0bbf988a@johnohagan.com> <D59C59453D0EDC43832490B6DADFAECF0432A191@XMB-RCD-214.cisco.com> <CAMZYqRSxAzLaea6aR0DNDnc-Jv3XWSPvo6cZdv4D0hcL5eeKTg@mail.gmail.com> <D59C59453D0EDC43832490B6DADFAECF0432A192@XMB-RCD-214.cisco.com> <mailman.2089.1312959211.1164.python-list@python.org>
Organization	Zen Internet

Show all headers | View raw

Danny Wong (dannwong) <dannwong@cisco.com> wrote:

>        cmd_output = subprocess.Popen(['scm', 'load', '--force',
> '-r', nickname, '-d', directory, project], stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
> stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
>       status = cmd_output.wait()

If you redirect stdout and/or stderr to a pipe, you must wait for EOF
before calling wait(), otherwise you risk deadlock (the process blocks
waiting for Python to read data from the pipe while Python is blocked
waiting for the process to terminate).

And if you redirect both stdout and stderr to pipes, you must either use
multiple threads or non-blocking I/O, otherwise you risk deadlock (the
process blocks waiting for Python to read data from one of the pipes while
Python is blocked waiting for the process to write to the other pipe).

I suggest looking at the .communicate() method of the Popen class.

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

Thread

Re: subprocess.Popen and thread module Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com> - 2011-08-09 23:53 -0700
  Re: subprocess.Popen and thread module Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-08-11 09:15 +0100

csiph-web