@@ -100,16 +100,16 @@ def _parse_lines_from_buffer(buf):
100100# end
101101
102102def _read_lines_from_fno (fno ,last_buf_list ):
103- buf = os .read (fno ,mmap .PAGESIZE )
104- buf = last_buf_list [0 ]+ buf
103+ for buf in iter ( lambda : os .read (fno ,mmap .PAGESIZE ), b'' ):
104+ buf = last_buf_list [0 ]+ buf
105105
106- bi = 0
107- for bi ,line in _parse_lines_from_buffer (buf ):
108- yield line
109- # for each line to parse from the buffer
106+ bi = 0
107+ for bi ,line in _parse_lines_from_buffer (buf ):
108+ yield line
109+ # for each line to parse from the buffer
110110
111- # keep remainder
112- last_buf_list [0 ]= buf [bi :]
111+ # keep remainder
112+ last_buf_list [0 ]= buf [bi :]
113113
114114def _dispatch_single_line (line ,handler ):
115115line = line .decode (defenc )
@@ -193,14 +193,24 @@ def _deplete_buffer(fno, handler, buf_list, wg=None):
193193else :
194194# Oh ... probably we are on windows. select.select() can only handle sockets, we have files
195195# The only reliable way to do this now is to use threads and wait for both to finish
196+ def _handle_lines (fd ,handler ,wg ):
197+ for line in fd :
198+ line = line .decode (defenc )
199+ if line and handler :
200+ handler (line )
201+ if wg :
202+ wg .done ()
203+
196204# Since the finalizer is expected to wait, we don't have to introduce our own wait primitive
197205# NO: It's not enough unfortunately, and we will have to sync the threads
198206wg = WaitGroup ()
199- for fno , (handler ,buf_list )in fdmap .items ():
207+ for fd ,handler in zip ((process .stdout ,process .stderr ),
208+ (stdout_handler ,stderr_handler )):
200209wg .add (1 )
201- t = threading .Thread (target = lambda :_deplete_buffer (fno ,handler ,buf_list ,wg ))
210+ t = threading .Thread (target = _handle_lines ,args = (fd ,handler ,wg ))
211+ t .setDaemon (True )
202212t .start ()
203- # end
213+
204214# NOTE: Just joining threads can possibly fail as there is a gap between .start() and when it's
205215# actually started, which could make the wait() call to just return because the thread is not yet
206216# active