Hype.Codes team have found several ways to solve this issue.
1. Using subprocess module in the standard library:
from subprocess import call call(["ls", "-l"])
The advantage of subprocess vs system is that it is more flexible.
The subprocess module provides more powerful facilities for spawning new processes and retrieving their results; using that module is preferable to using this function [
os.system("some_command with args") passes the command and arguments to your system's shell. This is nice because you can actually run multiple commands at once in this manner and set up pipes and input/output redirection. For example:
os.system("some_command < input_file | another_command > output_file")
However, while this is convenient, you have to manually handle the escaping of shell characters such as spaces, etc. On the other hand, this also lets you run commands which are simply shell commands and not actually external programs.
stream = os.popen("some_command with args") will do the same thing as os.systemexcept that it gives you a file-like object that you can use to access standard input/output for that process. There are 3 other variants of popen that all handle the i/o slightly differently. If you pass everything as a string, then your command is passed to the shell; if you pass them as a list then you don't need to worry about escaping anything.
call function from the
subprocess module. This is basically just like the
Popen class and takes all of the same arguments, but it simply waits until the command completes and gives you the return code. For example:
return_code = subprocess.call("echo Hello World", shell=True)
5. If you're on Python 3.5 or later, you can use the new subprocess.run function, which is a lot like the above but even more flexible and returns a CompletedProcess object when the command finishes executing.