On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 7:55 PM, David Lang <da...@lang.hm> wrote: > On Fri, 13 May 2016, Helmut Schaa wrote: >> I was thinking of a different use-case: >> Increasing the buffer size on the fly comes in handy during a debug >> session >> where you'd like to not interrupt logging (and thus potentially lose some >> parts >> of the syslog when restarting logd). >> >> Independent of how the implementation looks like I think the functionality >> would be quite useful. > > > I don't think it's very valuable. If you are debugging, you really don't > want to be tweaking anything in the middle of trying to capture data. you > want to set everything up and let it run, then analyze the data.
Let's rephrase it that way: If you debug a remote system without being able to tear it down it's quite useful to increase system verbosity and at the same time increase the log buffers (without affecting the overall system) to gather more information then would be possible in the default configuration. > I don't see that changing the log size in the middle of a capture run is a > good idea, let alone one that is common enough to have to introduce uci > specific knowledge into the logd daemon. I did not argue about how the patchset looks like, just about the functionality being useful under certain circumstances (for me it is useful). > You are better off sending to a remote logserver anyway. This might not always be possible. If it is, of course using remote syslog would be preferred. Helmut _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
