[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work

Ross Lagerwall added the comment: Unbuffered subprocess was fixed in 1dc52ecb8949 Closing this as a duplicate of #11459. -- nosy: +rosslagerwall resolution: -> duplicate status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker _

[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work

Hirokazu Yamamoto added the comment: Umm, v2 patch broke test_subprocess. I'll repost v3 patch after removing "bufsize=0 && universal_newlines" check. == ERROR: test_universal_newlines (__main__.ProcessTestCase) ---

[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work

Hirokazu Yamamoto added the comment: I implemented msg117279 with v2 patch. Can I commit it? # If your are already working on this issue, please ignore # my patch. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file19280/py3k_fix_unbuffered_in_subprocess_v2.patch _

[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: > > But if line buffering doesn't work, disabling buffering on > > stdout/stderr does have a functional consequence: it allows process > > output to appear as generated instead of coming in chunks when the > > buffer is full > > Yes, sorry, I had it backwards

[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: > But if line buffering doesn't work, disabling buffering on > stdout/stderr does have a functional consequence: it allows process > output to appear as generated instead of coming in chunks when the > buffer is full Yes, sorry, I had it backwards. It's buffe

[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work

R. David Murray added the comment: But if line buffering doesn't work, disabling buffering on stdout/stderr does have a functional consequence: it allows process output to appear as generated instead of coming in chunks when the buffer is full. Of course, I could be completely misunderstandi

[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work

Hirokazu Yamamoto added the comment: Antoine, can you create the patch? I'm not familiar with IO. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python

[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: As another sidenote, `bufsize` should only be relevant for stdin. For stdout and stderr, disabling buffering will only reduce performance, not add functionality. So I would suggest only setting buffering on stding. --

[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: You are right that it doesn't work anymore (under Linux too). Your patch is almost ok. It should raise a ValueError if bufsize=0 and universal_newlines is true (the two can't be satisfied together, since universal newlines implies buffering). It would also b

[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work (windows)

Hirokazu Yamamoto added the comment: Interestingly, following code also hangs. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the meaning of *bufsize* from subprocess import * import sys p = Popen([sys.executable, "-c", "import sys; print(sys.stdin.read(1))"], stdin=PIPE) p.stdin.write(b'xx') # size 2 p.wait

[issue9929] subprocess.Popen unbuffered not work (windows)

New submission from Hirokazu Yamamoto : Following script hangs on Python3.x. from subprocess import * import sys p = Popen([sys.executable, "-c", "import sys; print(sys.stdin.read(1))"], stdin=PIPE) p.stdin.write(b'x') p.wait() This is because unbuffered functionality of subprocess.Popen is d