|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

Thank you...

Thank you...

Posted Nov 20, 2011 21:15 UTC (Sun) by zlynx (guest, #2285)
In reply to: Thank you... by khim
Parent article: That newfangled Journal thing

It doesn't work for Windows.

Sure, developers are forced to report their event log messages in the event log binary format. They are also supposed to produce DLLs that contain text identifiers for the log messages.

Guess how many of them do this?

I'm as guilty as anyone. I just used one identifier and stuffed a free-form text message into the binary data field. I wasn't about to go through every debug log print and make a unique ID for it. Especially since C++ iostreams don't lend themselves to that in any way.

to post comments

Thank you...

Posted Nov 21, 2011 2:07 UTC (Mon) by alankila (guest, #47141) [Link]

I read that the uuid for journal message is optional. The recommendation, probably, is to add it, but of course if you do then you promise not to change the circumstances and meaning of the message, as you are basically declaring it as an API if you do.

Thank you...

Posted Nov 21, 2011 19:00 UTC (Mon) by faramir (subscriber, #2327) [Link] (3 responses)

Microsoft can't stop you from shipping your program if you don't follow the spirit of the rules.

Ubuntu/Fedora/Debian/etc. can effectively do this by refusing to include your program their core distribution.

That's not to say that the distributions would actually do this or that they wouldn't get push back from the developers of "important" packages. Still the differences between the Microsoft and Free Software worlds may make enforcement of good practices easier in the Free Software world.

Thank you...

Posted Nov 23, 2011 13:12 UTC (Wed) by sorpigal (subscriber, #36106) [Link]

Distributions don't have any more power than Microsoft to control what gets used on their OS. Distro packages are not the entire world.

Thank you...

Posted Dec 7, 2011 5:36 UTC (Wed) by Klavs (guest, #10563) [Link] (1 responses)

I will bet that a program, starting with logging everything with free form text to the same ID would, if used by sysadmins, quickly be improved upon, in regards to id logging. As a sysadmin I often have to look through source code to find the real reason for an error message (that's one big reason I prefer Open Source) - and if the program already used something with support for proper logging, like journald idea - I would easily whip up a patch for upstream to improve logging for the instance - helping myself in the future as well.

Thank you...

Posted Dec 7, 2011 10:35 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link]

what is it about the journal 'proper logging' that makes it any easier for you to write a patch to fix bad logging than with normal syslog?

normal syslog can deal with structured logging already via RFC 5324 structured logging, and the CEE specs standardize this further http://cee.mitre.org/

why are these not as good as the journal proposal?


Copyright © 2026, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds