On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Evangelos Foutras <[email protected]> wrote: > On 26 July 2011 06:36, Dave Reisner <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 06:26:40AM +0300, Evangelos Foutras wrote: >>> On 26 July 2011 05:43, Evangelos Foutras <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > On 25 July 2011 23:51, Tom Gundersen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> The VERBOSE parameter no longer has an effect, use the kernel's >>> >> loglevel= parameter instead. Most p >>> > >>> > I don't like this change. While you say there's a way to make it less >>> > verbose, after only merging the changes to rc.conf, dmesg output will >>> > get interleaved with initscripts output during boot, which looks >>> > horrible: http://imgur.com/a/wbG9z >>> > >>> > No signoff. :> >>> >>> Dave explained to me on IRC that the loglevel=[1-8] or quiet options >>> can be passed to the kernel to control this. >>> >>> It would make sense to default to, say, loglevel=4 (that's what quiet >>> sets) if no verbosity-related options are passed to the kernel. >> >> So, would this be done in initscripts or initramfs? The 'quiet' >> parameter isn't some big secret. > > I'd say in initscripts, because before that only the kernel prints > messages. When initscripts kicks in, its output gets combined with the > kernel messages and creates a visually unappealing result. :p > > I think that capping loglevel to 4 in initscripts would work well: > > --8<------------ > # limit console verbosity to no more than 4 (error conditions) > # this is done to keep initscripts' output clean and readable > set -- $(< /proc/sys/kernel/printk) > (( $1 > 4 )) && echo 4 >/proc/sys/kernel/printk > --8<------------ > > Opinions?
What about those who manually want to set the loglevel to something else? I guess we could put a notice in initscripts.install suggesting people to amend "quiet" to their kernel command line. Would that be ok? -t
