On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 07:06:38 -0400 (EDT)
Francesco Romani <fromani(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> useful you can add those parameters to execCmd
Good news about cpopen!
Is it a good idea to add even more parameters to execCmd? Let's discuss this.
another approach I could think of is
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/60660/
I'm not that proud of 60660 either, this is why it is a draft :\
So I've been in touch with Tomas, and he kindly tried to rebase his code
on top of my 60660, but looks like he was biten by issues fixed in
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/59181/
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/59095/
Actualy it has probably been fixed (as a side effect) of this:
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/46733/
I think leveraging cpopen is a good way, it is simple enough and it
doesn't
hurt our plans to eventually move to subprocess.
There is another problem with AsyncProc. When we pass `stderr=STDOUT` to popen
the returned object has None in stderr property. This is something AsyncProc
does not expect. It can be fixed with something like this:
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/60727/
--
Tomáš Golembiovský <tgolembi(a)redhat.com>