On Mar 16, 2010, at 21:52 , Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> Am Dienstag 16 März 2010 18:04:50 schrieb Martin Paljak:
>>> Maybe we should have a uniform handling for all tools?
>>> It is strange if one tool does this, and the others don't.
>>
>> The problem with stderr and stdout is that tools also wr
Am Dienstag 16 März 2010 18:04:50 schrieb Martin Paljak:
> > Maybe we should have a uniform handling for all tools?
> > It is strange if one tool does this, and the others don't.
>
> The problem with stderr and stdout is that tools also write independently
> to those files. What makes it hard to
On Mar 16, 2010, at 18:46 , Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> Am Dienstag 16 März 2010 17:36:31 schrieb Viktor TARASOV:
>> is it wanted that now, when using 'pkcs15-init' tool,
>> the more-then-once-verbose debug log goes onto 'stderr' ?
>
> a...@yomigaeri:~/projects/opensc/opensc/src/tools$ grep debug
Am Dienstag 16 März 2010 17:36:31 schrieb Viktor TARASOV:
> is it wanted that now, when using 'pkcs15-init' tool,
> the more-then-once-verbose debug log goes onto 'stderr' ?
a...@yomigaeri:~/projects/opensc/opensc/src/tools$ grep debug_file *.c
opensc-explorer.c: ctx->debug_fi
Hello Andreas,
is it wanted that now, when using 'pkcs15-init' tool,
the more-then-once-verbose debug log goes onto 'stderr' ?
Kind wishes,
Viktor.
--
Viktor Tarasov
___
opensc-devel mailing list
opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org
http://www.ope
Hi,
Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> we discussed this in the past, and the general consensus seems to
> improve the debug/logging code.
>
My point of view is quite on-sided .
Simplifying a little bit, from my 'developer' point of view there are
two contradicting aspirations,
from one side redu
On Mar 15, 2010, at 16:51 , Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> Am Montag 15 März 2010 14:26:53 schrieb Martin Paljak:
>> On Mar 14, 2010, at 16:25 , Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
>>> So please have a look at attached diff. If there are no objects, I would
>>> like to apply it. Further improvement can then b
On Mar 15, 2010, at 12:59 , Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
>> IMHO it is also important to have a difference in logging (which is usually
>> done in long-running applications) and piping debug information to
>> somewhere. OpenSC seems to fall into the latter category. As the name
>> implies, sc_debug d
Am Montag 15 März 2010 13:17:00 schrieb Martin Paljak:
> I wrote:
> "Instead of trying to categorize debug statements with code constants it
> would be better to *agree on some common levels for common tasks and
> document it and follow it*."
this still reads to me as a very vague concept. why c
Am Montag 15 März 2010 14:26:53 schrieb Martin Paljak:
> On Mar 14, 2010, at 16:25 , Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> > So please have a look at attached diff. If there are no objects, I would
> > like to apply it. Further improvement can then be made by everyone.
>
> If posting a patch (especially on
Am Montag 15 März 2010 07:38:45 schrieb Martin Paljak:
> For example, in the
> probably most common scenario (inside a function, after checking some
> return code) the essence of the debug call - the message itself - starts
> on column 53 (with tab size 8).
yes, small messages fit on the same
On Mar 14, 2010, at 16:25 , Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> So please have a look at attached diff. If there are no objects, I would
> like to apply it. Further improvement can then be made by everyone.
If posting a patch (especially one that goes through every single source file)
to the list in the
Hello,
On Mar 15, 2010, at 13:13 , Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> Am Montag 15 März 2010 07:38:45 schrieb Martin Paljak:
>> Encoding the common levels as wrapper functions or macros like
>> sc_debug1/SC_DEBUG1 would also be a solution
>
> if we use arbitrary values, we could be back to the old code
Am Montag 15 März 2010 07:38:45 schrieb Martin Paljak:
> Encoding the common levels as wrapper functions or macros like
> sc_debug1/SC_DEBUG1 would also be a solution
if we use arbitrary values, we could be back to the old code:
different numbers used in different places, but no guideline what
sh
Am Montag 15 März 2010 07:38:45 schrieb Martin Paljak:
> Shortening the constants is not the real solution either.
but if we want to do that, sed will be our friend, so
I don't think its a show stopper right now.
> Encoding the common levels as wrapper functions or macros like
> sc_debug1/SC_DEB
Hello,
On Mar 14, 2010, at 16:25 , Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> here is what I did so far:
> * removed SC_LOG_TYPE_DEBUG - we only have this type, so no need for it.
> * removed _sc_debug - was only used internally, call sc_do_log directly.
> * removed sc_do_log_va - was only used internally and i
16 matches
Mail list logo
