On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 05:21:29PM +0100, Thomas Haller wrote:
Choose a new logging format. - the logging format must not be configurable and it must be the same for all backends. It is neat that journal supports additional fields, but an average user still posts the output of plain journalctl, without "--output verbose" (which would also be hard to read).
Agree.
- the timestamp: I find it useful to see how much time between two events passed. The timestamp printed by syslog doesn't have sufficient granularity, and the internal journal fields are not readily available. We used to print the timestamps for <error>, <debug> and <trace>, but ommited them for <info> and <warn> levels. We now print them for all levels, also to preserve alignment.
I find it useful too. Maybe we can reduce the decimal digits to 4 and use a relative timestamp to further reduce line length: [001168.0381] platform-linux: udev-remove: IFINDEX=6 instead of: [1456431168.038195] platform-linux: udev-remove: IFINDEX=6
- the location: the "[file:line] func():" part is mostly redundant and results in wide lines. It also causes a misalignment of the logging lines, or -- as I recently added alignment of the location -- it results in awkward whitespace and truncation.
The code location indication makes lines harder to read, but is helpful to quickly find the code flow inside the program when debugging. I use that information quite often, but probably I can live without it if we make log messages more explicative and clear.
- logging-message: we need to write better logging messages.
Right, and IMHO we should try to update bad log messages before 1.2, otherwise it will be difficult to understand logs without the code location. Beniamino
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature