Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Output gets cut off if piped into another application #333

Closed
joewhite opened this issue Mar 19, 2012 · 62 comments
Closed

Output gets cut off if piped into another application #333

joewhite opened this issue Mar 19, 2012 · 62 comments
Labels
area: reporters involving a specific reporter type: bug a defect, confirmed by a maintainer

Comments

@joewhite
Copy link

If I run my Mocha tests directly from the command line, they run fine, and the output displays with no problems. But if I try to pipe Mocha's output to another program, the output doesn't all get there; only the beginning of the output ever makes it into the pipe.

I've seen this in several manifestations, but it's easy to reproduce just from the command line. I've reproduced this on two different computers, both running 64-bit Windows 7, the latest version of Node.js installed from the Web site, and the latest Mocha installed with npm install -g mocha.

If I create a file with just one test in it:

it('works', function() {});

and run it from the command line, I see the expected output:

C:\Temp>mocha test.js

  .

  ✔ 1 tests complete (2ms)


C:\Temp>

But if I pipe its output into any other tool, even something as simple as more, then Mocha's output is cut off. I only see the line of dots -- sometimes not even that. The summary line isn't shown.

C:\Temp>mocha test.js | more

  .

C:\Temp>

If there are failing tests, and you run STDERR through a pipe, then the test-failure information will be cut off:

C:\Temp>mocha fail.js 2>&1 | more

  .  Γ£û 1 of 1 tests failed:


C:\Temp>

I've also seen this behavior when running Mocha from my text editor (Sublime Text 2) and capturing the output into an output window (the output doesn't all appear); and when writing Node.js code that shells out to Mocha (using child_process.exec) and captures its STDOUT and STDERR (the output doesn't all get sent). I haven't seen any other app cutting off its output like this in any of these circumstances, but Mocha does it every time its output is a pipe.

@tj
Copy link
Contributor

tj commented Mar 19, 2012

well we do write to both std{err,out}, so some of that is expected

@joewhite
Copy link
Author

Why would it be expected that the output doesn't all get written?

@tj
Copy link
Contributor

tj commented Mar 19, 2012

each stream should definitely finish writing, which version of node is this? there have been a few issues

@joewhite
Copy link
Author

I'm using Node v0.6.12.

If the tests all pass, then Mocha doesn't write anything to stderr, and the output is still cut off when I run it through a pipe. So I'm not sure being able to use both streams has anything to do with it.

The docs for process.stdout mention that writes to stdout and stderr usually block, but when they're pipes, writes are non-blocking. I wonder if that's relevant.

@tj
Copy link
Contributor

tj commented Mar 20, 2012

guess we need to add those callbacks back, we used to have them but I removed them after isaac mentioned stdout was sync now (must have missed the pipe thing), seems kinda weird to do both.

@joewhite
Copy link
Author

I'm not sure when you removed these callbacks, but if it helps, I tried snagging older versions of Mocha, and this problem has existed since the oldest version available in npm (0.0.1-alpha1).

@tj
Copy link
Contributor

tj commented Mar 20, 2012

i'll mark it as a bug

@shwaydogg
Copy link

On Ubuntu 11.10 and OSX 10.7.2 pipes worked fine. On windows7, node 0.6.10, powershell and command prompt we could reproduce the bug. When output was piped to more there was either no output or just the a period nondeterministically.

PS C:\Users\Shwaydogg\Documents\HackerSchool> mocha test.js

  .

  ? 1 tests complete (12ms)


PS C:\Users\Shwaydogg\Documents\HackerSchool> mocha test.js | more

PS C:\Users\Shwaydogg\Documents\HackerSchool> mocha test.js 2>&1 | more

PS C:\Users\Shwaydogg\Documents\HackerSchool> mocha test.js | more

  .

PS C:\Users\Shwaydogg\Documents\HackerSchool>

@tj
Copy link
Contributor

tj commented Jun 17, 2012

This issue has been inactive for over 1 month so I'm closing it. If you think it's still an issue re-open. - tjbot

@tj tj closed this as completed Jun 17, 2012
@joewhite
Copy link
Author

Did you test this before you closed it? The problem is still trivially reproducible with the steps described, with the latest version of Mocha in npm (1.1.0).

I'd be happy to reopen the issue, but my "Reopen" button is grayed out, and when I hover over it, GitHub tells me "You don't have permission to reopen this issue".

@tj
Copy link
Contributor

tj commented Jun 17, 2012

my bot closed it, but yeah everything looks fine for me

@joewhite
Copy link
Author

shwaydogg already commented that it seems to work correctly on Ubuntu 11.10 and OSX 10.7.2. What OS and Node version are you using? I get the problem behavior every time on Windows 7 64-bit with Node 0.6.12 (and shwaydogg confirmed with Windows 7 and Node 0.6.10). I'd be happy to upgrade my Node if you're seeing no problems with a newer version.

@tj
Copy link
Contributor

tj commented Jun 17, 2012

i doubt it has anything to do with node/mocha, just terminals / shells, unicode blah blah

@joewhite
Copy link
Author

Seems likely, but I've tried reproducing the problem in a standalone app (without Mocha), and so far I haven't been able to. So there's probably some Node feature Mocha is using that behaves badly with pipes, but it's not obvious to me what that feature might be (and it's also not obvious whether it would be easier to fix it in Node, or work around it in Mocha). Here's what I know so far from my experiments:

  • If I run Mocha with --no-colors and a pipe, it still has the problem. (Not surprising, since Node probably assumes no-colors when its output isn't a TTY, but it's good to narrow the scope.)
  • If I write an app that console.logs all the same strings Mocha outputs -- "", " .", "", and " \u2714 1 test complete (2ms)" -- then all the output comes through more; nothing is cut off. more apparently doesn't understand UTF-8, so it outputs three nonsense characters instead of the check, but the output is all there. So I don't think it's Unicode that's causing the failure, or at least not in an obvious way.
  • Same thing if I use process.stdout.write (and manually add \n to each string) instead of console.log. IIRC, Mocha does use process.stdout.
  • Same thing if I write everything up to the . immediately, and the remainder (including the .'s \n) from inside a setTimeout (to simulate the sort of async work Mocha is doing, and try to bring on any concurrency problems the async pipe might have). Doesn't matter whether I do a short timeout (I tried 50, 10, and even 0) or a long one (1000). Same thing if I use process.nextTick instead of setTimeout.

more evidently buffers its output a line at a time, so if I output the . and then wait before I output the \n, then I see a pause before I see the . at all. But that's different from Mocha, where there's a pause, and then either the dot appears or it doesn't, and nothing after the dot ever appears.

Here's my test app, in case it's helpful:

process.stdout.write("\n");
process.stdout.write("  .");
setTimeout(function() {
    process.stdout.write("\n");
    process.stdout.write("\n");
    process.stdout.write("  \u2714 1 test complete (2ms)\n");
}, 1000);

Any thoughts on what sorts of things Mocha might be doing with its I/O that I'm not covering? It'd be good to narrow down where the problem is.

@Bartvds
Copy link

Bartvds commented Jun 27, 2012

i have this with a mocha fresh from npm on new node 0.8 64bit on Vista64 (yesyes :) where i fixed the path.existsSync warning, seems to work fine but im on windows for now and have no make to run tests (jake! :)

mocha runs ok from cmd, nice colors etc

but when calling mocha with node's child_process .exec or .spawn directly (and also through jake's .exec and using procstreams), then i get the warbled and unstable output mentioned above. it's same with the calling mocha js api from jake.

i get this in standard cmd, in some third party Console2 and also in SublimeText's console (when cli calling a jake build task).

i tried hacking/bypassing with my own reporter but ran into #323 (add arbitrary reporter) and so far failed in enabeling my reporter (index and needs a make/build?)

@velesin
Copy link

velesin commented Jul 3, 2012

In my case (Windows7 64) everything works fine in console, but when I invoke the same command via Node's exec or spawn, only part of message is displayed (e.g. all error messages are missing). This problem makes it impossible for me to run mocha from my coffee script's Cake file.

@Honigbaum
Copy link

Any solutions? Same problem here with node 0.8.4 and mocha 1.3.0 on Windows 7 64Bit, it's not possible to use mocha from cakefile or in combination with nodemon (as workaround for failing --watch on Windows)

@dougwilson
Copy link
Contributor

The problem is because mocha calls process.exit() which terminates the node event loop before the data to STDOUT/STDERR has finished being written. This only happens when you pipe it to another program that doesn't read enough from the pipe before mocha does process.exit(). Calling process.stdout.write is sometimes sync and sometimes async. The return value of process.stdout.write lets you know if the input was buffered or not. mocha should probably check that the streams have drained before calling process.exit().

I believe that when std{out,err} are connected to a console, they are a SyncWriteStream, in which case the .write() calls are indeed sync, but std{out,err} can be pointed anywhere. When they are pointed at a pipe they are instead a WriteStream in which case the .write() call could be buffering the the write (as determined by the return value).

There is a .flush() that will write the remaining buffer in a WriteStream in sync, but apparently node does not provide a no-op .flush() on a SyncWriteStream. The easiest change I can think of is to have mocha do this before calling process.exit():

process.stdout.flush && process.stdout.flush();
process.stderr.flush && process.stderr.flush();

I don't have Node.js installed on Windows to try, but if @Honigbaum, @velesin, @Bartvds, or @joewhite want to see if this is a fix that works under Windows, they can edit the _mocha program and change the mocha.loadFiles call at line 324 to

mocha.loadFiles(function(){
  mocha.run(function(){
    process.stdout.flush && process.stdout.flush();
    process.stderr.flush && process.stderr.flush();
    process.exit();
  });
});

@Honigbaum
Copy link

@dougwilson
Thank you for your answer. I tried your solution and it unfortunately did not work ...

@dougwilson
Copy link
Contributor

@Honigbaum you have pushed me to actually install node on Windows and figure it out :) I have inspected process.stdout when it is connected to a pipe and it has the property _pendingWriteRequests set to a non-zero value, which confirms that the process.exit call occurs before the buffer is flushed out of node. Apparently it is actually a Socket object with _type set to "pipe" (for those interested, handling a pipe for stdio can be found in src/node.js line 397. This means that there actually isn't a .flush() on a piped stream, which is why my initial suggested didn't work.

It's too bad that the pipes are a Socket because it's more complicated to wait for them to drain before calling process.exit(). Here is a tested and confirmed working replacement for the mocha.loadFiles call:

mocha.loadFiles(function(){
  mocha.run(function(){
    var draining = 0;
    var exit = function(){ if (!draining--) process.exit(); };
    if (process.stdout.bufferSize) {
      draining += 1;
      process.stdout.once('drain', exit);
    }
    if (process.stderr.bufferSize) {
      draining += 1;
      process.stderr.once('drain', exit);
    }
    exit();
  });
});

Other solutions are to not actually call process.exit() or to provide callbacks to all the process.stdout.write calls throughout mocha, though that would be a lot of work. For Windows users who want to edit their mocha file, the file is located at %APPDATA%\npm\node_modules\mocha\bin\_mocha if mocha was installed globally (with npm install -g mocha).

@dougwilson
Copy link
Contributor

As of mocha version 1.3.2, the workaround above now replaces the code in bin/_mocha line 322 with the following:

mocha.run(function(){
  var draining = 0;
  var exit = function(){ if (!draining--) process.exit(); };
  if (process.stdout.bufferSize) {
    draining += 1;
    process.stdout.once('drain', exit);
  }
  if (process.stderr.bufferSize) {
    draining += 1;
    process.stderr.once('drain', exit);
  }
  exit();
});

@matthewrobb
Copy link

I have version 1.4.2 and am just now beginning to experience this issue... :/

@tj tj reopened this Sep 11, 2012
@tj
Copy link
Contributor

tj commented Sep 11, 2012

i'll have a closer look at this soonish, kinda silly that we have to do this at the user level but hey

@matthewrobb
Copy link

And if it helps, replacing the above mentioned lines does solve the problem.

@tj
Copy link
Contributor

tj commented Sep 11, 2012

keep in mind this needs to work for 0.4.x 0.6.x and 0.8.x

@tj
Copy link
Contributor

tj commented Sep 11, 2012

0.4.x i imagine we can phase out soon though

@Honigbaum
Copy link

Same problem with 1.6 ... Would be happy if there is a solution in one of the next versions

@stevenvachon
Copy link

@dougwilson Yep, but if your solution were implemented, --no-exit would not be necessary for most cases under Windows. I personally like the idea of returning an exit code.

@dougwilson
Copy link
Contributor

In 0.11, you can actually still exit with an exit code without the need to call process.exit(), though I'm not sure who actually uses 0.11.

@boneskull
Copy link
Contributor

@dougwilson OK, so is @travisjeffery's patch good? With caveats? Can you summarize? :D

@boneskull boneskull added the status: waiting for author waiting on response from OP - more information needed label Nov 21, 2014
@dougwilson
Copy link
Contributor

The patch just changes the issue instead of resolving it. The patch just needs to be changed to look like #333 (comment) . Let me know if you want me to send a PR and I can do it pretty quickly.

@boneskull
Copy link
Contributor

@dougwilson Sure, thanks.


@dougwilson
Copy link
Contributor

Done at #1440 . I'm just waiting to see if Travis CI says green, since the test suite doesn't actually work on Windows.

@boneskull boneskull removed status: waiting for author waiting on response from OP - more information needed TO-MERGE labels Jan 10, 2015
@am11
Copy link

am11 commented Jan 16, 2015

Hello guys, over at node-sass, we are also experiencing the same issue. Any updates?

Related: sass/node-sass#506 and http://help.appveyor.com/discussions/problems/1091-npm-test-always-fails.

Note: we tried @stephenmathieson's suggestion and used --no-exit, but then it doesn't exit the test process even after passing all the testes (until the CI times out and reports failure).

@dougwilson
Copy link
Contributor

@dougwilson
Copy link
Contributor

@am11 it was merged here, but just hasn't yet been released to npm.

@am11
Copy link

am11 commented Jan 16, 2015

@dougwilson, thanks for fixing this issue in mocha. 👍

Over at node.js, they have fixed it in 0.12 branch, but yet to backport to 0.10.x branch: nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#7196 (see the late comments). Not sure if/ever it will land in 0.10.x branch.

@dougwilson
Copy link
Contributor

I doubt they'll ever backport it to 0.10.

@jbnicolai
Copy link

Fix has been shipped ^^

@chris-codaio
Copy link

Looks like this is failing now on node 7.2.1. The stream.write('', done); call never calls the callback. I'll open a new bug to track.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area: reporters involving a specific reporter type: bug a defect, confirmed by a maintainer
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests