stackSentinel background task fix

[hardreddata]

There is a problem with #223 in which any tasks running in the background will continue in the background when the next step of the process begins (eg: run_03 can bleed into run_04). This causes issues when some steps try and use incomplete data.

The proposed solution writes a final wait in any shell scripts which leverage num_process.

I welcome any feedback.

[yunjunz]

Unrelated to this specific PR, but I would suggest to simplify write_wrapper_config2run_file() by:

• set default line_cnt=1
• change if line_cnt == numProcess to if line_cnt % numProcess == 0

In this way, the input line_cnt is the actual line index, so we don't need to return this variable, thus, shorten all calls of the func from:

line_cnt = configObj.write_wrapper_config2run_file(configName, line_cnt)

to

configObj.write_wrapper_config2run_file(configName, line_cnt)

[hardreddata]

@yunjunz I would be happy to change

        line_cnt = 1
        configObj.write_wrapper_config2run_file(configName, line_cnt)

to

        configObj.write_wrapper_config2run_file(configName)

in the three occurrences. I left as above as it might be simpler to follow.

Presently the stackSentinel.py num_process is buggy so I think good to get this merged. Apologies for the delay.

[yunjunz]

Thank you for getting back to this @RussellGrew. Could you do the following?

1. Rebase this PR against the latest main branch, as the stack processor has been updated and GitHub flagged conflicts.
2. Apply the same enumerate style call to the new functions added within the class run(object).

@yunjunz I would be happy to change

        line_cnt = 1
        configObj.write_wrapper_config2run_file(configName, line_cnt)

to

        configObj.write_wrapper_config2run_file(configName)

in the three occurrences. I left as above as it might be simpler to follow.

I would prefer the latter one. We don't need to show the details if we don't have to.

[hardreddata]

@yunjunz I think that is everything.

[yunjunz]

These two still stand I believe:

1. Rebase this PR against the latest main branch, as the stack processor has been updated and GitHub flagged conflicts.
2. Apply the same enumerate style call to the new functions added within the class run(object). E.g., filtIon(). They will be visible in this PR after rebasing.

[hardreddata]

@yunjunz see 4ffbfff and 8971f52

Though this was the first time I have attempted to update a branch for an in progress PR. Hopefully it went ok.

Edit - I see that it did not. Leave it with me.

[hardreddata]

That should be much closer.

You did this to yourself with your notes of encouragement on https://mintpy.readthedocs.io/en/latest/#5_contributing

I see the CI has now passed.

I am not familiar with these new ionosphere steps. I checked that the config is written out, and that step 17 and 18 which consider the numProcess are written correctly.

Cheers.

[yunjunz]

LGTM. Thank you @RussellGrew!