Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell • Hacker News Board

Re: Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell

#11

Post by gerdesj » Sun, Jun 11, 2017, 9:51 PM UTC

fnj wrote: post #7

noobiemcfoob wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xonsh is a shell that integrates Python at the command line. This is a library to make calls to the command line.

And your point is??

At the risk of simply putting words into noobiemcfoob's mouth:

"Xonsh is " NOT " how to do this."

Re: Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell

#12

Post by gerdesj » Sun, Jun 11, 2017, 9:58 PM UTC

When I dabble with Python to get a job done, I invariably end up using subprocess at some stage and going through some contortions. I like the look of Sultan, it seems well thought out and has loads of well written docs.

Anyone know how the name came about?

Re: Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell

#13

Post by niothiel » Sun, Jun 11, 2017, 10:01 PM UTC

fermigier wrote: post #10

I've been using 'tentakel' for remote server admin for years, 'fabric' for lightweight deployment, and more recently 'invoke' for local invocations (all are Python projects). This project looks interesting too, will give it a try. BTW: Has anyone news on Fabric 2 ?

Would love to know this as well.

Re: Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell

#14

Post by asdfgadsfgasfdg » Sun, Jun 11, 2017, 10:03 PM UTC

How does

      s(command_from_potentially_unsafe_source).run()

compare with

      os.system(command_from_potentially_unsafe_source)

or

      subprocess.call(command_from_potentially_unsafe_source, shell=True)

securitywise? I'm assuming all three are equally bad?

Re: Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell

#15

Post by quixoticaxolotl » Sun, Jun 11, 2017, 10:09 PM UTC

asdfgadsfgasfdg wrote: post #14

How does s(command_from_potentially_unsafe_source).run() compare with os.system(command_from_potentially_unsafe_source) or subprocess.call(command_from_potentially_unsafe_source, shell=True) securitywise? I'm assuming all three are equally bad?

I looked at the source code. Under the hood, it's just a thin wrapper around `subprocess`.

Re: Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell

#16

Post by asdfgadsfgasfdg » Sun, Jun 11, 2017, 10:18 PM UTC

quixoticaxolotl wrote: post #15

asdfgadsfgasfdg wrote: post #14

How does s(command_from_potentially_unsafe_source).run() compare with os.system(command_from_potentially_unsafe_source) or subprocess.call(command_from_potentially_unsafe_source, shell=True) securitywise? I'm assuming all three are equally bad?

I looked at the source code. Under the hood, it's just a thin wrapper around `subprocess`.

Cool subprocess is a little verbose. But did you happen to notice if it executes with shell=True or shell=False?

Re: Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell

#17

Post by Eridrus » Sun, Jun 11, 2017, 10:31 PM UTC

Since we're throwing out random shell related tools, I found pexpect recently: https://pexpect.readthedocs.io/en/stable/api/replwrap.html

Which was super useful for controlling some utilities that wanted to be run in an interactive bash shell.

Re: Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell

#18

Post by onyb » Sun, Jun 11, 2017, 10:54 PM UTC

This seems to be a simple wrapper around subprocess, but I'm afraid it is not changing things dramatically. Overall, I don't agree that Sultan's syntax is any more Pythonic than subprocess itself.

+1 for https://sultan.readthedocs.io/en/latest/sultan-examples.html...

I think it would be interesting if you could iterate on the results of "ls -l", where each row is represented by an object.

Re: Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell

#19

Post by santiagobasulto » Sun, Jun 11, 2017, 11:07 PM UTC

How's this different from sh or fabric?

Re: Show HN: Sultan – Pythonic interface to your shell

#20

Post by llccbb » Sun, Jun 11, 2017, 11:08 PM UTC

Seems like there is lots of talk here about how this is thin wrapper over `subprocess`, but I like the idea. What I don't like is that the logo looks like a penis with a mustache.