[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: dpkg.log reworked

>> "BC" == Ben Collins <bmc@visi.net> writes:

BC> On Fri, Jan 01, 1999 at 09:37:06PM +0100, Martin Bialasinski wrote:

>> With the dpkg-log layer, one can dump any output to it, and it would
>> find out, if it is in a interactive install and write the comments to
>> screen on its own.
>> You just have to change one packgage to implement this, not all. This
>> is prefarable :-)

BC> The package should decide whether or not it goes to stdout or syslog
BC> (it may want both).

No, dpkg-log should. The user could set e.g to_screen=yes in
/etc/deb-log.conf or in an environment variable or such. This is a
better solution. The user can still see the messages, but he
additionally has control over the process how they are handled.

For now, the deb-log would show everything on stdout, but when we have 
the installation process split into interactive/non-interactive, the
user (using deb-log setup) can redirect all output off the
non-interactive part to the log for later reference (thing about
unattendad installations) and have the interactive part displayed on

This way the logic is in the deb-log program, not in every *inst

This is really more general and better (if there are no flows in the

BC> I don't see why dpkg-log couldn't be a logger wrapper

It should be + it should still output to stdout, as we didn't split
the install process yet.

BC> so that any new logging method could simply add an alternative to
BC> that wrapper.

Exactly my point (see my other message).


Reply to: