Re: log4cxx in apt?
Daniel Burrows <dburrows@debian.org> writes:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to propose that we start using log4cxx in apt, replacing
> (eventually) the various semi-documented Debug:: configuration items
> that are currently used to enable debugging traces.
>
> I've started using it for debugging in the aptitude development
> branch, and I've found it to be a huge improvement (not unsurprisingly,
> given my past experiences with other frameworks like this). The
> logging macros make it easy to add logging statements anywhere you
> might want to, and the performance cost is relatively low too. One of
> the big problems with developing and debugging apt has traditionally
> been that it's very opaque; aggressively writing trace statements will
> help to combat that.
>
> If log4cxx is used, I'd suggest that we adopt a policy similar to
> what I've done in aptitude, where loggers are only retrieved by
> invoking a "getFooLogger()" method that's in a central .h file. The
> advantage is that you can get an at-a-glance picture of which logging
> categories are being used in the project, which should make it easier
> to keep documentation up to date.
>
> I would also suggest that we start implementing operator<<() for
> some of the major apt structures (in particular, for cache iterators),
> for use in logging statements; again, this is about driving down the
> programmer-cost of logging so that we get more logging statements
> where they're needed.
>
> Comments?
>From my side! Go ahead! Michael?
--
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
E-mail: otavio@debian.org UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br
---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives
you the whole house."
Reply to: