multiscreen logging

[Martin Klapetek]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Sebastian Kügler <sebas at kde.org> wrote:

> On dinsdag 26 juli 2016 19:44:11 CEST Martin Klapetek wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Sebastian Kügler <sebas at kde.org> wrote:
> >
> > What do you think? If you like the idea, I'll polish up my branch and
> will
> > post it for review, so we can discuss the actual implementation.
> >
> > I think a possible better way could be to log each component into each
> own
> > file (in the same dir) with timestamps and function stamps and process
> > stamps and everything and then merge those files using some automation
> and
> > sort by timestamp. Unless Qt on Linux actually handles concurrent write
> > access just fine and in the correct order (I know it didn't on Windows
> last
> > time I looked).
>
> Potentially, yes. Is it a problem? No.
>
> The log file isn't critical, and *usually* components are able to write in
> order (appending to a file doesn't take long). If the log ends up being
> slightly corrupted, that's bad luck. Instead of implementing complex
> merging
> tools


for i in "file1" "file2" "file3"; do cat $i >> output.file; done; cat
output.file | sort > final.log

...not that complex :) Just the sort needs proper params depending on the
timestamp.


> or file-locking mechanism, having just these processes write to the same
> file and cross fingers works well enough. It's a debugging tool, file
> integrity is just not that important.
>

Dunno, doesn't seem all that useful to have a debugging tool that may
or may not work, especially if it is ever going to be used by users to post
in bugreports. What use would be corrupted logs to us? Might as well do
it properly, especially when the added complexity can be just oneliner
bash script.

Cheers
-- 
Martin Klapetek
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/plasma-devel/attachments/20160727/2bf76348/attachment.html>