75

I'm looking for a Python solution that will allow me to save the output of a command in a file without hiding it from the console.

FYI: I'm asking about tee (as the Unix command line utility) and not the function with the same name from Python intertools module.

Details

  • Python solution (not calling tee, it is not available under Windows)
  • I do not need to provide any input to stdin for called process
  • I have no control over the called program. All I know is that it will output something to stdout and stderr and return with an exit code.
  • To work when calling external programs (subprocess)
  • To work for both stderr and stdout
  • Being able to differentiate between stdout and stderr because I may want to display only one of the to the console or I could try to output stderr using a different color - this means that stderr = subprocess.STDOUT will not work.
  • Live output (progressive) - the process can run for a long time, and I'm not able to wait for it to finish.
  • Python 3 compatible code (important)

References

Here are some incomplete solutions I found so far:

Diagram http://blog.i18n.ro/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Drawing_tee_py.png

Current code (second try)

#!/usr/bin/python
from __future__ import print_function

import sys, os, time, subprocess, io, threading
cmd = "python -E test_output.py"

from threading import Thread
class StreamThread ( Thread ):
    def __init__(self, buffer):
        Thread.__init__(self)
        self.buffer = buffer
    def run ( self ):
        while 1:
            line = self.buffer.readline()
            print(line,end="")
            sys.stdout.flush()
            if line == '':
                break

proc = subprocess.Popen(cmd, shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
stdoutThread = StreamThread(io.TextIOWrapper(proc.stdout))
stderrThread = StreamThread(io.TextIOWrapper(proc.stderr))
stdoutThread.start()
stderrThread.start()
proc.communicate()
stdoutThread.join()
stderrThread.join()

print("--done--")

#### test_output.py ####

#!/usr/bin/python
from __future__ import print_function
import sys, os, time

for i in range(0, 10):
    if i%2:
        print("stderr %s" % i, file=sys.stderr)
    else:
        print("stdout %s" % i, file=sys.stdout)
    time.sleep(0.1)
Real output
stderr 1
stdout 0
stderr 3
stdout 2
stderr 5
stdout 4
stderr 7
stdout 6
stderr 9
stdout 8
--done--

Expected output was to have the lines ordered. Remark, modifying the Popen to use only one PIPE is not allowed because in the real life I will want to do different things with stderr and stdout.

Also even in the second case I was not able to obtain real-time like out, in fact all the results were received when the process finished. By default, Popen should use no buffers (bufsize=0).

Peter Mortensen
  • 28,342
  • 21
  • 95
  • 123
sorin
  • 137,198
  • 150
  • 472
  • 707
  • related: [Python subprocess get children's output to file and terminal?](http://stackoverflow.com/q/4984428/4279) – jfs Feb 18 '14 at 12:14
  • related: [Subprocess.Popen: cloning stdout and stderr both to terminal and variables](http://stackoverflow.com/q/17190221/4279) – jfs Oct 06 '14 at 12:39
  • 1
    Possible duplicate of [Python Popen: Write to stdout AND log file simultaneously](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/15535240/python-popen-write-to-stdout-and-log-file-simultaneously) Voting this way because this is a community wiki :-) – Ciro Santilli新疆棉花TRUMP BAN BAD Aug 30 '18 at 06:01

6 Answers6

15

I see that this is a rather old post but just in case someone is still searching for a way to do this:

proc = subprocess.Popen(["ping", "localhost"], 
                        stdout=subprocess.PIPE, 
                        stderr=subprocess.PIPE)

with open("logfile.txt", "w") as log_file:
  while proc.poll() is None:
     line = proc.stderr.readline()
     if line:
        print "err: " + line.strip()
        log_file.write(line)
     line = proc.stdout.readline()
     if line:
        print "out: " + line.strip()
        log_file.write(line)
jdi
  • 83,050
  • 18
  • 151
  • 188
Ben
  • 31
  • 1
  • 5
  • This worked for me, though I found `stdout, stderr = proc.communicate()` easier to use. – Chase Seibert Oct 30 '12 at 22:04
  • 20
    -1: This solution leads to a deadlock for any subprocess that can generate enough output on stdout or stderr and where stdout/stderr are not perfectly in sync. – jfs Feb 18 '14 at 12:17
  • @J.F.Sebastian: True, but you can workaround that problem by replacing `readline()` with `readline(size)`. I have done something similar in other languages. Ref: https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.TextIOBase.readline – kevinarpe Jun 06 '15 at 07:48
  • 5
    @kevinarpe wrong. `readline(size)` won't fix the deadlock. stdout/stderr should be read concurrently. See links under the question that show solutions using threads or asyncio. – jfs Jun 06 '15 at 11:22
  • @J.F.SebastianDoes this problem exist if I'm only interested in reading one of the streams? – ThorSummoner Sep 25 '15 at 22:02
  • @ThorSummoner: naturally, there is no issue if only [one stream is redirected to a pipe](http://stackoverflow.com/a/17698359/4279). – jfs Feb 13 '16 at 12:58
  • Is this really guaranteed not to miss any piped `stdout`? Let's say `proc` produces two final lines to stdout within the time frame of two subsequent `proc.poll()` calls: **1.** `proc.poll() == None` -> read single line -> one more line exists in `stdout` but process is finished -> **2.** `proc.poll() == returncode` and the `while` loop breaks (while there is still remaining lines in `stdout`). Also, consider setting `stderr` to `subprocess.STDOUT` to avoid deadlocks. – dfrib Apr 05 '18 at 08:16
7

This is a straightforward port of tee to Python.

import sys
sinks = sys.argv[1:]
sinks = [open(sink, "w") for sink in sinks]
sinks.append(sys.stderr)
while True:
  input = sys.stdin.read(1024)
  if input:
    for sink in sinks:
      sink.write(input)
  else:
    break

I'm running on Linux right now but this ought to work on most platforms.


Now for the subprocess part, I don't know how you want to 'wire' the subprocess's stdin, stdout and stderr to your stdin, stdout, stderr and file sinks, but I know you can do this:

import subprocess
callee = subprocess.Popen( ["python", "-i"],
                           stdin = subprocess.PIPE,
                           stdout = subprocess.PIPE,
                           stderr = subprocess.PIPE
                         )

Now you can access callee.stdin, callee.stdout and callee.stderr like normal files, enabling the above "solution" to work. If you want to get the callee.returncode, you'll need to make an extra call to callee.poll().

Be careful with writing to callee.stdin: if the process has exited when you do that, an error may be rised (on Linux, I get IOError: [Errno 32] Broken pipe).

badp
  • 10,846
  • 3
  • 56
  • 84
  • 2
    This is suboptimal in Linux, since Linux provides an ad-hoc [`tee(f_in, f_out, len, flags)`](http://linux.die.net/man/2/tee) API, but that's not the point right? – badp Jun 08 '10 at 13:44
  • 1
    I updated the question, the problem is that I was not able to find how to use subprocess in order to get the data from the two pipes gradually and not all at once at the end of the process. – sorin Jun 08 '10 at 15:15
  • I know that your code should work but there is a small requirement that does break the entire logic: I want to be able to distinguish between stdout and stderr and this means that I have to read from both of them but I do not know which will get new data. Please take a look at the example code. – sorin Jun 09 '10 at 07:06
  • 1
    @Sorin, that means you'll have to either use two threads. One reads on `stdout`, one reads on `stderr`. If you are going to write both to the same file, you can acquire a lock on the sinks when you start reading and release it after writing a line terminator. :/ – badp Jun 09 '10 at 14:02
  • Using threads for this does not sounds too appealing to me, maybe we'll find something else. It's strange that this is a common issue but nobody provided a complete solution for it. – sorin Jun 09 '10 at 17:35
  • @badp I tried the threads a approach but it doesn't work. I updates the question to include the new example. – sorin Jun 30 '10 at 14:56
  • @Sorin The output you have posted _is_ ordered. You had `line1 line3 line5 line7 line9` on stderr, `line0 line2 line4 line6 line8` on stdout. Sure, in that run the `stderr` thread happened to get output first, which meant you had `line1 line0 line3 line2 line5 line4...` instead of `line0 line1 line2 line3 line4 line5...` -- but you didn't get `line0 line3 line5 line1 line2...` or `line4 line2 line1 line0 line6...` or `line0 liline1 line3 linne2 line3e5...`. I'm afraid that for a program that has to accept arbitrary input this kind of nondeterminism is unaivoidable if not even necessary. – badp Jun 30 '10 at 16:48
7

If requiring python 3.6 isn't an issue there is now a way of doing this using asyncio. This method allows you to capture stdout and stderr separately but still have both stream to the tty without using threads. Here's a rough outline:

class RunOutput():
    def __init__(self, returncode, stdout, stderr):
        self.returncode = returncode
        self.stdout = stdout
        self.stderr = stderr

async def _read_stream(stream, callback):
    while True:
        line = await stream.readline()
        if line:
            callback(line)
        else:
            break

async def _stream_subprocess(cmd, stdin=None, quiet=False, echo=False) -> RunOutput:
    if isWindows():
        platform_settings = {'env': os.environ}
    else:
        platform_settings = {'executable': '/bin/bash'}

    if echo:
        print(cmd)

    p = await asyncio.create_subprocess_shell(cmd,
                                              stdin=stdin,
                                              stdout=asyncio.subprocess.PIPE,
                                              stderr=asyncio.subprocess.PIPE,
                                              **platform_settings)
    out = []
    err = []

    def tee(line, sink, pipe, label=""):
        line = line.decode('utf-8').rstrip()
        sink.append(line)
        if not quiet:
            print(label, line, file=pipe)

    await asyncio.wait([
        _read_stream(p.stdout, lambda l: tee(l, out, sys.stdout)),
        _read_stream(p.stderr, lambda l: tee(l, err, sys.stderr, label="ERR:")),
    ])

    return RunOutput(await p.wait(), out, err)


def run(cmd, stdin=None, quiet=False, echo=False) -> RunOutput:
    loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
    result = loop.run_until_complete(
        _stream_subprocess(cmd, stdin=stdin, quiet=quiet, echo=echo)
    )

    return result

The code above was based on this blog post: https://kevinmccarthy.org/2016/07/25/streaming-subprocess-stdin-and-stdout-with-asyncio-in-python/

stason
  • 3,487
  • 2
  • 22
  • 38
kalebo
  • 195
  • 4
  • 8
5

This is how it can be done

import sys
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE

with open('log.log', 'w') as log:
    proc = Popen(["ping", "google.com"], stdout=PIPE, encoding='utf-8')
    while proc.poll() is None:
        text = proc.stdout.readline() 
        log.write(text)
        sys.stdout.write(text)
Danylo Zhydyk
  • 11
  • 1
  • 2
1

If you don't want to interact with the process you can use the subprocess module just fine.

Example:

tester.py

import os
import sys

for file in os.listdir('.'):
    print file

sys.stderr.write("Oh noes, a shrubbery!")
sys.stderr.flush()
sys.stderr.close()

testing.py

import subprocess

p = subprocess.Popen(['python', 'tester.py'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
                     stdin=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)

stdout, stderr = p.communicate()
print stdout, stderr

In your situation you can simply write stdout/stderr to a file first. You can send arguments to your process with communicate as well, though I wasn't able to figure out how to continually interact with the subprocess.

Wayne Werner
  • 41,650
  • 21
  • 173
  • 260
  • 2
    This doesn't show you error messages in STDERR in context of STDOUT, which can make debugging shell-scripts etc nearly impossible. – RobM Jul 01 '10 at 09:42
  • Meaning...? In this script anything delivered through STDERR is printed to the screen along with STDOUT. If you're referring to return codes, just use `p.poll()` to retrieve them. – Wayne Werner Jul 01 '10 at 12:44
  • 1
    This doesn't satisfy the "progressive" condition. – ivan_pozdeev Oct 18 '19 at 07:07
-1

My solution isn't elegant, but it works.

You can use powershell to gain access to "tee" under WinOS.

import subprocess
import sys

cmd = ['powershell', 'ping', 'google.com', '|', 'tee', '-a', 'log.txt']

if 'darwin' in sys.platform:
    cmd.remove('powershell')

p = subprocess.Popen(cmd)
p.wait()
Alex Myers
  • 4,257
  • 7
  • 17
  • 33
Danylo Zhydyk
  • 11
  • 1
  • 2