run()/sudo() would intelligently see that you're going to localhost and just run local() instead. This would probably be an optional thing.
Comments from Jeff on IRC:
and yea, I mean there's always going to be overhead with ssh vs straight pipes
offhand I don't think it would be terrifically difficult to update run/sudo (especially in master now that they've been refactored) to call/return local() intelligently
I'm not positive that I'd want that semi magical behavior in core (even with it off by default with an optin to enable it, tho that would help)
but even so, it'd be an interesting experiment.
and if it is as simple as I'm thinking I honestly can't come up with a good reason not to (again provided it is not the default behavior)
Originally submitted by Nick Welch (mackstann) on 2009-11-11 at 01:39pm EST
Pick your reaction
James Pearson (xiong.chiamiov) posted:
As also mentioned on irc, I don't normally run ssh server on a desktop machine, so I can't actually ssh to localhost.
on 2009-11-11 at 03:13pm EST
Travis Swicegood (tswicegood) posted:
I've just implemented something similar this evening in the form of a new fabric.operations function called do. It looks at env.run_as to see if it equals "local", and in doing so switches out to the local method instead of the run (or sudo if sudo=True is passed in as a kwarg). It also handles prefixing local commands with sudo in the event they're running local.
This is sort of a different way around this problem which works without changing the behavior of run or sudo. These changes are available in my repository.
on 2010-01-11 at 12:22am EST
Morgan Goose (goosemo) posted:
I really don't see this being plausible. What's the point in doing run as local. One of the requirements of Fabric is sshd running on the machine, remote or loopback. The other problem being that only changing local doesn't take into account put, get, rsync_project, and others that would all still need ssh. Trying to implement those, would just really cause more issues, since it's now in the realm of making fabfiles translate to bash.
on 2011-03-13 at 11:14pm EDT
Jeff Forcier (bitprophet) posted:
While I'm also not 100% convinced this is a great idea, it's clearly something a number of users feel the need for -- another request has been lodged as #364 with another explanation of the use case.
I've also added the dry-run ticket as related to this one, because (I assume -- if any of the requesting users can verify this that'd be great) the main use case for this feature is for testing/dry-running.
on 2011-06-23 at 11:26am EDT
As noted in #538, if we're ever able to fully normalize the three runners so they can be used interchangeably, we'll need to make sure that shell escaping works consistently across them. Right now we don't shell escape local, though that's at least partly because it's not using a shell wrapper.
If anyone is wondering "why would anyone do this?", the answer is that if you have a deployment pipeline, it can be helpful to run the same exact deployment script, no matter which environment, rather than having a special setup script for localhost vs. everything else.
+1 for the feature
To hold you over, you can just make sure you have the OpenSSH server running. First do sudo apt-get install ssh to make sure you have it installed (even if you think you do). Then do sudo service ssh start|stop|restart as needed. Learned from this thread.
sudo apt-get install ssh
sudo service ssh start
My use case is simple: I want to use the same django-deploy script to configure ec2 instances both with cloud-init through CloudWatch (the case for running local commands) and using the regular fab deploy_django -H foo@bar.
fab deploy_django -H foo@bar
This would be really useful. One use case I have is using vagrant shell provisioner to configure particular vm using fabric and without the need to ssh localhost.
I was surprised not to see this in Fabric already.
FYI: Implementation of this feature gets more complex when you think about fabric functions like reboot().
Should be part of core already !
It would perfectly make sense: from an abstract point of view, local is just a special case of run, where no SSH machinery is involved.
One more thing to point out (maybe obvious): Fabric should be smart enough to decide if a run should be converted to local AFTER reading /etc/hosts.
I mean: if we have
env.host = [ 'mywebserver' ]
and in /etc/hosts we have:
then, any run calls should actually be local calls.
Taking this concept a step further, we should also treat run as a local call when the remote host resolves to an IP which is assigned to a network interface of the local machine.
Fabric 2 will use pyinvoke/invoke so this should be pretty easy to do there. I would wait for Fabric 2 for a non-hacky way to do this.
👍 Please implement this, especially as mac computers aren't automatically set up to have SSH tunnels configured for remote access to the localhost server.
We're using Fab to build debian packages and this adds extra complexity
guys, hello all
i try to create clone of fabric with difference:
You can take a look if you need this feature
I may be missing something in this discussion, but here is what I did to use the same code with fab run command on both localhost and remote machines.
env.use_ssh_config = True
This doesn`t solve your issue if you are not running ssh server on your local machine
+1 Please implement this feature :)
Could be very useful to bootstrap Docker images using existing Fabric scripts. This feature would avoid to install an SSH server on the container, which is against the Docker best practices
Further to the answer provided by @AntoniosHadji, here are the complete instructions to make this work;
# Generate new SSH key for local usage
ssh-keygen -f ~/.ssh/id_rsa -N ''
# Add server keys to users known hosts (eliminates 'are you sure' messages);
ssh-keyscan -H localhost > ~/.ssh/known_hosts
# Allow user to ssh to itself
cat ~/.ssh/id_rsa.pub >> ~/.ssh/authorized_keys
Actually, this can be done using cuisine. You need to change all run executions to reference cuisine.run function, which can be done easily with an import, and change the mode to local:
from cuisine import run, mode_local
print run("echo Hello")
For simple use cases, this works for me:
from fabric.api import run, local
# in task:
if env.host is None or env.host == 'localhost':
run = local
I want my fabfile to run remotely or locally when ssh isn't an option. This includes local wrappers for get/put/exists etc.
👍 I have fabfiles that run both locally and remotely and I've ended up hacking my own wrapper functions for run/local/get to deal with all of subtle differences such as output capture and error handling.
What if you have a ssh connection doing dynamic port forwarding and binding on 127.0.0.2 (still technically localhost) on port 2223. I can see how this could cause issues, to that end matching on localhost and resolving to 127.0.0.1 rather than also supporting the entire 127.0.0.0/8 class might be a good idea to handle.
@blade2005 Yep, the whole 127...* range point to your localhost(except 127.0.0.0 and 127.255.255.255) but when you are actually pointing to your localhost you won't use port right?
So I believe that we can safely assume that 127.*.*.* == localhost and ssh can be avoided but 127.*.*.*:* point to a forwarded port and ssh is needed.
127.*.*.* == localhost
Honestly, this feature would probably make more sense as a 3rd party plugin built on fabric, similar to the cuisine library. Then we would just import wrapped functions for run/get/put/etc, which would know wether to run locally or remotely based on an env variable. At least this way, somebody could get this started for everybody to use.
I implemented something locally, and its a lot more work than just switching between local/run. You have to consider prefixes, changed directories, sudo users, etc.
Was briefly thinking about this in the context of another 2.0 related ticket, and realized that there's more that comes up besides just "run becomes a rebinding of local":