10383 2016-10-05 19:27:30 +0000 create test for subprocess calls to identify problems 2017-12-06 17:10:57 +0000 1 1 7 Build System, Metadata & Runtime OE-Core core 2.2 x86 Multiple RESOLVED FIXED https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9342 Medium enhancement 2.4 10411 1 stephano stephano benjamin.esquivel bluelightning joshuagloe meta.mr.watcher meta.watcher --- --- No (bug/feature does not impact docs) oldest_to_newest 66959 0 stephano 2016-10-05 19:27:30 +0000 There should be a test for subprocess calls so that once all the strings have been cleaned up and turned into arrays, regressions do not occur. Also, this will be a handy tool to identify places where subprocess still needs to be cleaned up. See Bug 9342 for more info on this subject. 66992 1 benjamin.esquivel 2016-10-06 15:15:29 +0000 is this something like git grep subprocess? 68282 2 stephano 2016-11-14 18:27:49 +0000 It's a little more comprehensive than that. If we want to avoid the use of shell=True, there should be some way of tracking how often this is used. If not, then any efforts to clean this up will be competing with the slow influx of shell=True in new code. The goal is that we would like to avoid (whenever possible) unwieldy shell commands that could be prone to breaking. We currently don't have any check to see how many of these commands exist, and if that number is increasing. We'd like to be able to keep an eye on this going forward, but I don't know enough about our test infrastructure to know if there are any tools in place to do this currently. Do you know of a way we could keep an eye on this? 68306 3 benjamin.esquivel 2016-11-14 23:35:37 +0000 We currently have no static analysis extensions written, but adding a custom checker to pylint [1] should cover the case you're describing. Now that doesn't solve everything, it would still be required: 1. to have a defined codebase where to run this checker against (is it the entire poky repo? I don't think so.) 2. to have a regular execution scheduled for these types of checks, I would suggest the odd milestones (M1, M3) [1] https://pylint.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reference_guide/custom_checkers.html 68383 4 benjamin.esquivel 2016-11-16 21:05:02 +0000 Just found out that the pylint checkers will be run as a part of patchtest testing. Adding the dependency of the bug. 69043 5 stephano 2016-12-12 17:31:52 +0000 Moving this to M2 since I won't have time today to close this out. 75723 6 joshuagloe 2017-08-08 14:36:35 +0000 Several patches for this have landed, any future work should be filed as a new bug with specific changes required.