Process.Start() failure should include path #46417

batzen · 2020-12-27T13:44:02Z

This PR fixes #39928

ghost · 2020-12-27T13:44:07Z

Tagging subscribers to this area: @eiriktsarpalis
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details

This PR fixes #39928

Author:	batzen
Assignees:	-
Labels:	`area-System.Diagnostics.Process`
Milestone:	-

adamsitnik

@batzen big thanks for your PR! I've left some comments, please address them and take a look at the failing tests (let me know if you need some help in getting some information from CI logs).

Could you also remove the empty file (src/installer/snaps/dotnet-sdk/dotnet-runtime) ?

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/src/System/Diagnostics/Process.cs

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/src/System/Diagnostics/Process.Unix.cs

adamsitnik · 2021-01-04T13:03:41Z

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/src/Resources/Strings.resx

@@ -185,6 +185,9 @@
  <data name="InvalidApplication" xml:space="preserve">
    <value>The specified executable is not a valid application for this OS platform.</value>
  </data>
+  <data name="FailedToStartFileDirectory" xml:space="preserve">
+    <value>Failed to start '{0}' with working directory '{1}'. {2}</value>


It's just an opinion (and I can see that it was a suggestion in the original issue #39928 (comment)), but I think that it would be better to append the missing information to the existing exception message. Especially if we want to add it for all throwing cases (not just when the file is not found)

Suggested change

<value>Failed to start '{0}' with working directory '{1}'. {2}</value>

<value>{2} (the file name was '{0}', the working directory '{1}').</value>

So we would have:

- The system cannot find the file specified + The system cannot find the file specified (the file name was 'abc.exe', the working directory 'C:\xyz').

Instead of:

- The system cannot find the file specified + Failed to start 'abc.exe' with working directory 'C:\xyz'. The system cannot find the file specified

cc @danmosemsft who proposed the initial version

How about "{0} (file: '{1}', working directory: '{2}')." then?

Given that "file name" is not always appropriate as it could also be an absolute/relative path to some exe.
Even file is not always the right term/word as it could also be "ftp://something" or "https://something", but "file" sounds better than "file name" here.
Or should we stick with "file name" as the property is also called "FileName"?

Are there native errors that could produce an empty message?
In that case the original proposed message would still make sense whereas the new one would look awkward.

- Failed to start 'abc.exe' with working directory 'C:\xyz'. + (the file name was 'abc.exe', the working directory 'C:\xyz').

How about "{0} (file: '{1}', working directory: '{2}')." then?

Sounds good to me!

Are there native errors that could produce an empty message?

This is a very good question. From what I can see in the source code, there is no such possibility for Windows:

runtime/src/libraries/Common/src/Interop/Windows/Kernel32/Interop.FormatMessage.cs

Line 74 in 144cac3

return string.Format("Unknown error (0x{0:x})", errorCode);

And on Unix we end up calling strerror_r:

runtime/src/libraries/Common/src/Interop/Unix/Interop.Errors.cs

Line 170 in 144cac3

byte* message = StrErrorR(platformErrno, buffer, maxBufferLength);

runtime/src/libraries/Native/Unix/System.Native/pal_errno.c

Line 18 in 1d9e50c

return StrErrorR(platformErrno, buffer, bufferSize);

and the docs for it says that it also returns unknow error message for such cases:

The strerror(), strerror_l(), and the GNU-specific strerror_r()
functions return the appropriate error description string, or an
"Unknown error nnn" message if the error number is unknown.

So I think that we can assume that it's never empty.

With respect to the message, my only thought is whether exceptions might occur that wouldn't suggest we were trying to start a process. Eg., System is not in a good state (the file name was 'abc.exe', the working directory 'C:\xyz'). (I made this up - but OS sometimes give strange errors). If you don't have the callstack, only the message, it is not clear what is going on. This problem already exists of course - but that was my reasoning for the "failed to start" text.
But this is @adamsitnik call.

After some manual testing, such as where the filename provided is a directory, the message, "No such file or directory (file: '/home`, working directory: '/home')" seems confusing to me. I agree with the previous comments that having "failed to start" at the beginning is a better experience; the second part of the message is the underlying error.

In that spirit, I'll go with "An error occurred trying to start process '{0}' with working directory '{1}'. {2}".

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/src/System/Diagnostics/Process.Windows.cs

batzen · 2021-01-04T16:19:57Z

@adamsitnik I just had a look at the failing tests when running on unix.
They are caused by the fact that the Process class tries to resolve the path for fileName and returns null if nothing was found.
This is then special cased in ForkAndExecProcess. This means that the originally passed in file name is already lost.

I don't know why it's done this way and what happens in Interop.Sys.ForkAndExecProcess if the passed file name does not exist.
According to the code of SystemNative_ForkAndExecProcess the method tries to access the passed filename and if that fails the method also fails. But it just fails with -1 instead of something meaningful.

Do you have any idea on how i should proceed here?
I guess i have to change ForkAndExecProcess and it's callers to not pass null and change SystemNative_ForkAndExecProcess so that it returns ENOENT if access fails.

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/tests/ProcessTests.cs

batzen · 2021-02-06T12:02:15Z

@adamsitnik I guess you missed my results and the question about the failing Linux tests. Would be nice if you could have a look. ;-)

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/tests/ProcessTests.cs

…s/Process.cs Co-authored-by: Adam Sitnik <adam.sitnik@gmail.com>

…s/Process.Unix.cs Co-authored-by: Adam Sitnik <adam.sitnik@gmail.com>

batzen · 2021-03-27T09:19:56Z

@adamsitnik Tests are now working on unix and i just rebased again.
I am still not sure about the final error message.
Currently it's "{0} (file: '{1}', working directory: '{2}').".

jeffhandley · 2021-04-18T06:54:47Z

@adamsitnik Tests are now working on unix and i just rebased again.
I am still not sure about the final error message.
Currently it's "{0} (file: '{1}', working directory: '{2}').".

That message format seems good to me.

@adamsitnik -- could you take a look at the previous comment when you get a chance please?

jeffhandley · 2021-05-09T05:23:24Z

@adamsitnik -- could you take a look at the previous comment when you get a chance please?

Ping on this, @adamsitnik. 😄

iSazonov · 2021-05-12T09:19:38Z

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/src/System/Diagnostics/Process.Unix.cs

+                    ForkAndExecProcess(originalFilename, filename, argv, envp, cwd,
                        startInfo.RedirectStandardInput, startInfo.RedirectStandardOutput, startInfo.RedirectStandardError,
                        setCredentials, userId, groupId, groups,
                        out stdinFd, out stdoutFd, out stderrFd, usesTerminal);


Too many parameters! Maybe pass startInfo?

ForkAndExecProcess(startInfo, filename, argv, envp, cwd, setCredentials, userId, groupId, groups, out stdinFd, out stdoutFd, out stderrFd, usesTerminal);

jeffhandley · 2021-05-28T02:00:27Z

@adamsitnik It looks like this PR is still awaiting your re-review. Note this comment too.

jeffhandley · 2021-07-08T19:35:56Z

@batzen You're right; we let you down here. We failed to prioritize this and also failed to set expectations that we wouldn't be able to prioritize it until other work was completed. This isn't how we want to treat contributors and I'm glad you called us out on it. Thank you for letting us know how this was affecting you and I'm sorry.

I guess i have to change ForkAndExecProcess and it's callers to not pass null and change SystemNative_ForkAndExecProcess so that it returns ENOENT if access fails.

That sounds like the right approach to me. I hope it's OK with you, but I'd like to update your branch with the latest from main, resolve the conflicts, and take a closer look at this. I'll comment back within the next couple of days with the intention of getting this merged by Monday or Tuesday of next week so that this fix can make .NET 6 Preview 7.

batzen · 2021-07-08T21:03:20Z

@jeffhandley Thanks for your kind response.
It would be very nice if my changes could be merged for .NET 6 preview 7.

According to the changes that could/should be made in ForkAndExecProcess and SystemNative_ForkAndExecProcess:
I don't feel very confident in doing those as my experience with Linux is near to zero and i barely managed to get the tests running locally with WSL to fix the failing tests. The changes in this PR also work without those other changes, but the native message presented to the user might not be accurate, as far as i understood by following the code flow.

jeffhandley · 2021-07-08T21:49:04Z

Thank you, @batzen. I'll push some changes to your branch to get it caught up and then I'll check in again once I look more closely into ForkAndExecProcess and SystemNative_ForkAndExecProcess.

jeffhandley · 2021-07-14T02:50:03Z

I guess I have to change ForkAndExecProcess and its callers to not pass null and change SystemNative_ForkAndExecProcess so that it returns ENOENT if access fails.

I'm going to split the difference on this. I'm changing ForkAndExecProcess within Process.Unix.cs to accept the ProcessStartInfo startInfo, string? resolvedFilename..., but I'm leaving Interop.ForkAndExecProcess alone.

I'm doing some manual testing on both Ubuntu and Windows with these changes now; I expect to have this ready for re-review tomorrow.

jeffhandley · 2021-07-14T07:09:25Z

Test failures:

runtime (Libraries Test Run release coreclr Linux x64 Debug):
- System.Net.Http.Functional.Tests.SocketsHttpHandlerTest_Http2.Http2_MultipleConnectionsEnabled_ConnectionLimitNotReached_ConcurrentRequestsSuccessfullyHandled
  - "The request was canceled due to the configured HttpClient.Timeout of 100 seconds elapsing."
  - Unrelated; see Enable Http2_MultipleConnectionsEnabled_ConnectionLimitNotReached_ConcurrentRequestsSuccessfullyHandled #55572
- System.Net.Http.Functional.Tests
  - Log
  - Looks like an infrastructure error; no test results were found

jeffhandley · 2021-07-14T15:49:36Z

@batzen @stephentoub This is ready for re-review.

batzen · 2021-07-14T16:08:42Z

LGTM

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/src/System/Diagnostics/Process.Unix.cs

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/src/System/Diagnostics/Process.Win32.cs

Co-authored-by: Stephen Toub <stoub@microsoft.com>

ghost · 2021-07-14T20:15:25Z

Hello @jeffhandley!

Because this pull request has the auto-merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.

p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (`@msftbot`) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.

danmoseley · 2021-07-14T23:16:21Z

Failures aren't showing up here for some reason (but are likely all unrelated)
opened #55689

danmoseley · 2021-07-14T23:29:42Z

System.IO.FileSystem.Net5Compat.Tests failed on Android with:

07-14 20:40:48.840  1565  1565 E lowmemorykiller: Kill 'net.dot.System.IO.FileSystem.Net5Compat.Tests' (7383), uid 10115, oom_adj 0 to free 2107432kB

Isolated storage tests failed on Android with

      <test name="System.IO.IsolatedStorage.Tests.HelperTests.GetDataDirectory(scope: Machine)" type="System.IO.IsolatedStorage.Tests.HelperTests" method="GetDataDirectory" time="0.0380145" result="Fail">
        <failure exception-type="System.IO.IOException">
          <message><![CDATA[System.IO.IOException : Read-only file system]]></message>
          <stack-trace><![CDATA[   at System.IO.FileSystem.CreateDirectory(String fullPath) in System.Private.CoreLib.dll:token 0x600553a+0x1a2
   at System.IO.Directory.CreateDirectory(String path) in System.Private.CoreLib.dll:token 0x60053e6+0x2d
   at System.Environment.GetFolderPathCore(SpecialFolder folder, SpecialFolderOption option) in System.Private.CoreLib.dll:token 0x60002b0+0x65
   at System.Environment.GetFolderPath(SpecialFolder folder, SpecialFolderOption option) in System.Private.CoreLib.dll:token 0x600029a+0x73
   at System.IO.IsolatedStorage.Helper.GetDataDirectory(IsolatedStorageScope scope) in /_/src/libraries/System.IO.IsolatedStorage/src/System/IO/IsolatedStorage/Helper.Win32Unix.cs:line 25
   at System.IO.IsolatedStorage.Tests.HelperTests.GetDataDirectory(IsolatedStorageScope scope) in /_/src/libraries/System.IO.IsolatedStorage/tests/System/IO/IsolatedStorage/HelperTests.cs:line 47
   at System.Reflection.RuntimeMethodInfo.Invoke(Object obj, BindingFlags invokeAttr, Binder binder, Object[] parameters, CultureInfo culture) in System.Private.CoreLib.dll:token 0x6004b15+0x6a]]></stack-trace>
        </failure>

System.Security.Cryptography.Xml tests failed with

      <test name="System.Security.Cryptography.Xml.Tests.SigningVerifyingX509Cert.SignedXmlHasDSACertificateVerifiableSignature" type="System.Security.Cryptography.Xml.Tests.SigningVerifyingX509Cert" method="SignedXmlHasDSACertificateVerifiableSignature" time="0.0440539" result="Fail">
        <failure exception-type="System.Security.Cryptography.CryptographicException">
          <message><![CDATA[System.Security.Cryptography.CryptographicException : The certificate data cannot be read with the provided password, the password may be incorrect.\n---- System.PlatformNotSupportedException : Algorithm 'RC2' is not supported on this platform.]]></message>
          <stack-trace><![CDATA[   at Internal.Cryptography.Pal.UnixPkcs12Reader.Decrypt(SafePasswordHandle password, Boolean ephemeralSpecified) in System.Security.Cryptography.X509Certificates.dll:token 0x600020e+0xb3

Oh, now I see that this is staging and can be ignored. But I'll leave this here for reference. cc @steveisok

danmoseley · 2021-07-14T23:47:35Z

I realize now (1) failures in azdo are in staging and can be ignored (2) failure above should be ignored as it's staging also, but since it's a timeout it's not due to limitations.
So this is mergeable.

danmoseley · 2021-07-14T23:49:22Z

@batzen thank you for the contribution here. It should go out in .NET 6 preview 7 in about a month. I second @jeffhandley comments that we aim to be more responsive on PR's and generally we are I think. I do hope you will continue to contribute and either Jeff or myself will pay special attention to any future PR you offer to make sure we do better.

jeffhandley · 2021-07-15T01:19:16Z

Thanks for checking the tests and merging this, @danmoseley.

@batzen, this will be included in Preview 7. Thanks again for the contribution and for the feedback and help!

Dotnet-GitSync-Bot added the area-System.Diagnostics.Process label Dec 27, 2020

adamsitnik reviewed Jan 4, 2021

View reviewed changes

adamsitnik added this to the 6.0.0 milestone Jan 4, 2021

danmoseley reviewed Jan 4, 2021

View reviewed changes

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/tests/ProcessTests.cs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Base automatically changed from master to main March 1, 2021 09:07

carlossanlop assigned adamsitnik Mar 15, 2021

batzen force-pushed the issues/39928 branch from b5db145 to 7276391 Compare March 16, 2021 15:09

danmoseley reviewed Mar 16, 2021

View reviewed changes

src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/tests/ProcessTests.cs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

batzen and others added 13 commits March 27, 2021 10:16

Adding ProcessStartException

a98caf7

Reverting ProcessStartException

b07d1a2

First version

c10f235

Fixing merge issue

08ee21a

Using interop call instead of intermediate exception to get error msg

5fb88c3

Fixing typo

e8a7cf8

Change checks for exception message

7e58fad

Update src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/src/System/Diagnostic…

68ccd75

…s/Process.cs Co-authored-by: Adam Sitnik <adam.sitnik@gmail.com>

Update src/libraries/System.Diagnostics.Process/src/System/Diagnostic…

7384df6

…s/Process.Unix.cs Co-authored-by: Adam Sitnik <adam.sitnik@gmail.com>

Using common method to create exception and updating error message

81b963e

Fixing merge mistake

24d4232

Using AssertExtensions.ThrowsContains

40f8c7a

Fixing code for unix

29a22ef

batzen force-pushed the issues/39928 branch from 2b4a95b to 29a22ef Compare March 27, 2021 09:16

iSazonov reviewed May 12, 2021

View reviewed changes

jeffhandley self-assigned this Jul 8, 2021

jeffhandley added 2 commits July 8, 2021 22:52

Merge branch 'main' into issues/39928

f72a1f6

Merge branch 'main' into issues/39928

ba64c57

runfoapp bot mentioned this pull request Jul 13, 2021

system.net.http.functional.tests.socketshttphandlertest_http2 test failure for Linux-x64 #55590

Closed

jeffhandley added 2 commits July 13, 2021 22:25

Address PR feedback

c885672

Merge branch 'main' into jeffhandley/39928

0b91e4e

jeffhandley mentioned this pull request Jul 14, 2021

Enable Http2_MultipleConnectionsEnabled_ConnectionLimitNotReached_ConcurrentRequestsSuccessfullyHandled #55572

Merged

stephentoub reviewed Jul 14, 2021

View reviewed changes

Apply suggestions from code review

09dc7e7

Co-authored-by: Stephen Toub <stoub@microsoft.com>

stephentoub approved these changes Jul 14, 2021

View reviewed changes

Fix ErrorInfo type reference

e6c160a

jeffhandley added the auto-merge label Jul 14, 2021

danmoseley merged commit 720279c into dotnet:main Jul 14, 2021

danmoseley mentioned this pull request Jul 14, 2021

System.IO.FileSystem.Net5Compat.Tests failed on Android due to lowmemorykiller #55691

Closed

ManickaP mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2021

[QUIC] Remove AppContext switch from S.N.Quic #56027

Merged

karelz mentioned this pull request Jul 22, 2021

Test failure: System.Net.Http.Functional.Tests.SocketsHttpHandlerTest_Http2.Http2_MultipleConnectionsEnabled_ConnectionLimitNotReached_ConcurrentRequestsSuccessfullyHandled #41078

Closed

ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 14, 2021

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Process.Start() failure should include path #46417

Process.Start() failure should include path #46417

batzen commented Dec 27, 2020

ghost commented Dec 27, 2020

adamsitnik left a comment

adamsitnik Jan 4, 2021

batzen Jan 4, 2021

adamsitnik Jan 4, 2021

danmoseley Jan 4, 2021

jeffhandley Jul 14, 2021

batzen commented Jan 4, 2021

batzen commented Feb 6, 2021

batzen commented Mar 27, 2021

jeffhandley commented Apr 18, 2021

jeffhandley commented May 9, 2021

iSazonov May 12, 2021

jeffhandley commented May 28, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 8, 2021

batzen commented Jul 8, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 8, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 14, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 14, 2021 •

edited

Loading

jeffhandley commented Jul 14, 2021

batzen commented Jul 14, 2021

ghost commented Jul 14, 2021

danmoseley commented Jul 14, 2021

danmoseley commented Jul 14, 2021

danmoseley commented Jul 14, 2021

danmoseley commented Jul 14, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 15, 2021

	<value>Failed to start '{0}' with working directory '{1}'. {2}</value>
	<value>{2} (the file name was '{0}', the working directory '{1}').</value>

Process.Start() failure should include path #46417

Process.Start() failure should include path #46417

Conversation

batzen commented Dec 27, 2020

ghost commented Dec 27, 2020

adamsitnik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

adamsitnik Jan 4, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

batzen Jan 4, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

adamsitnik Jan 4, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

danmoseley Jan 4, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jeffhandley Jul 14, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

batzen commented Jan 4, 2021

batzen commented Feb 6, 2021

batzen commented Mar 27, 2021

jeffhandley commented Apr 18, 2021

jeffhandley commented May 9, 2021

iSazonov May 12, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jeffhandley commented May 28, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 8, 2021

batzen commented Jul 8, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 8, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 14, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 14, 2021 • edited Loading

jeffhandley commented Jul 14, 2021

batzen commented Jul 14, 2021

ghost commented Jul 14, 2021

p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.

danmoseley commented Jul 14, 2021

danmoseley commented Jul 14, 2021

danmoseley commented Jul 14, 2021

danmoseley commented Jul 14, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 15, 2021

jeffhandley commented Jul 14, 2021 •

edited

Loading

p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (`@msftbot`) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.