Re: [PATCH 2/4] classes/testsdk: Move the removal of bitbake PATH to eSDK context only

[Randy Witt <randy.e.witt@linux.intel.com>]

On 02/22/2016 09:05 AM, Aníbal Limón wrote:
>
>
> On 02/22/2016 10:48 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>> On 22 February 2016 at 16:37, Aníbal Limón <anibal.limon@linux.intel.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree with you to modify avoid_paths_in_environ for return the new
>>> PATH variable is better than only modify it internally but for
>>> simplicity i will maintain the os.environ['PATH'] set/restore instead of
>>> generate the environment line.
>>>
>>
>> Totally agree with Randy here for what it's worth.  The environment-munging
>> code in avoid_paths... should return the strings instead of manipulating
>> the current environment so the caller has the choice whether to modify the
>> current environment or pass a new environment to subprocess.  And in
>> general I'd say that passing modified environments to subprocess is a
>> cleaner solution as it means that there's no way cleanup can fail to
>> happen.  Whilst that's just a try/except now, the code could get copied and
>> extended and end up with codepaths that don't hit the right cleanup.  By
>> having an explicit environment passed in, this isn't possible.
>
> Agree, now modified at,
>
> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=alimon/esdk_update_v2&id=3143bf09130c52cd71e3f2f9795208e17152005d

If you either convert path to a dict or have avoid_paths_in_environ() return a 
dict you can do:

+            output = subprocess.check_output(". %s > /dev/null; %s;" % \
+                (self.tc.sdkenv, cmd), env=path, shell=True)

It's not quite obvious in the docs that you can pass that in, they refer you to 
the Popen docs.

> Cheers,
> 	alimon
>
>>
>> Ross
>>
>