Bug#169600: Policy should mandate a place for init.d script to log errors to
>> On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 10:48:55 +0100,
>> Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña <jfs@computer.org> said:
> However, even if it's common sense, it might be necessary to
> introduce also a convention regarding error checking and
> logging.
Don't we already have /var/log as a recommended place for
logging?
> Many maintainers are getting used (and I see this from init.d
> scripts derived from RedHat packages' code) to *not* check errors
> at all. Maintainers are sometimes sending output to /dev/null in
> order to not taint the console's output which might lead to the
> user not being aware of problems/issues when a script is run. Some
> maintainers are doing it properly (and sending a 'failed' to
> console when it cannot start) and some are not. However even in the
> previous case, the user might want to dig into the problem in order
> to see what/why has failed.
Sounds like buggy behaviour. Why do we need policy to tell
people not to write buggy code?
> IMHO the policy should mandate that error checking be done and any
> errors be sent in "not verbose" format to the console (...failed)
> and in verbose format to some log (which should be of course
> logrotated but that'0s another issue).
I don't think this should be in policy. Why should the
package not be able to use debconf to ask the user what to do, and
provide details on request?
I think the developer's common sense should be allowed to
determine what is the best course.
However, ignoring errors silently is a bug, and should be
reported as such.
> The location of this log (/var/log/messages or a new one
> /var/log/init.d.log?) should be specified in this policy too. Any
> errors/messages from the init.d scripts should be sent there. This
> makes it easier for users to know why a given service has failed in
> case the system starts up unattended (and thus nobody looks at the
> console) or it lacks console at all.
I don't agree. Why can't I send log messagesot, say,
/var/log/gnus_install.log ? Why does it need to go through syslog?
This smacks of micromanagement.
manoj
--
The best equipment for your work is, of course, the most
expensive. However, your neighbor is always wasting money that should
be yours by judging things by their price.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: