➜
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2006-01-04 13:21 by ragnar, last changed 2022-04-11 14:56 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Messages (3) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg54701 - (view) | Author: Ragnar Ouchterlony (ragnar) | Date: 2006-01-04 13:21 | |
I would appreciate if the wait() method of Popen() would be able to take a time argument, to wait at most this time, before returning. It would be nice to be able to wait for a program, and if it has hanged, you still get back to the program. |
|||
| msg71786 - (view) | Author: (gd2shoe) | Date: 2008-08-22 22:22 | |
This is just common sense. I'm trying to avoid a poll() busy-wait section of code. I'll figure it out, but it would be much, much easier if wait accepted a number of seconds, and returned None if the process was still going (cf. Popen.poll() ). I'm much happier with subprocess than os.popen*. I'm also glad that Popen.kill() is slated for 3.0 . Since this isn't in the 3.0b3 documentation, I assume this either isn't fixed or planned? Are there implementation difficulties? |
|||
| msg111214 - (view) | Author: Stefan Krah (skrah) *  |
Date: 2010-07-22 20:48 | |
This is now being addressed in issue 5673, so closing this as a duplicate. astrand, please let me know if I'm wrong about this. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:56:14 | admin | set | github: 42761 |
| 2010-07-22 20:48:01 | skrah | set | status: open -> closed superseder: Add timeout option to subprocess.Popen nosy: + skrah messages: + msg111214 resolution: duplicate stage: resolved |
| 2008-08-22 22:22:23 | gd2shoe | set | nosy:
+ gd2shoe messages: + msg71786 |
| 2006-01-04 13:21:40 | ragnar | create | |