Hi Thomas, Thanks for your patchset, looks promising.
I didn't fully understand your requirements for such unique IDs, but they of course might be helpful for different things. The question I'm asking is: do you need these IDs across multiple loggers, i.e. do we have to add this (a little exotic) unique ID parameter to all loggers? What about extending the logger_t interface by an optional "vlog" method that takes the raw format string along with a va_list? This would allow your logger backend to create/map these unique IDs just for itself without letting other loggers bother with them, and then take appropriate actions. If required, we could even add a mechanism of some kind that would allow your logger to re-feed log messages back to bus, and then to a different logger. That approach would be a little more flexible, as we are not bound to an arbitrary 64-bit identifier, but can inspect the raw format string in the logging backend. Does that sound reasonable? Regards Martin _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.strongswan.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
