On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 20:58 +0200, Nedko Arnaudov wrote:
> Bob Ham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 18:56 +0200, Juuso Alasuutari wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 22 January 2008 15:39:20 Nedko Arnaudov wrote:
> >
> >> Capturing the clients' debug messages would indeed be helpful. How do you 
> >> think it should be handled?
> >
> >> Idiot-proof capturing of stdout/err could probably only work if the client 
> >> process was executed from a wrapper. It could be accomplished with the 
> >> D-Bus 
> >> service file, though. If all clients' service files would be mandated to 
> >> include something like "Exec=/usr/bin/lash_exec /usr/bin/foobar", then... 
> >> Umm, at least we could redirect the streams _somewhere_ -- but what to do 
> >> from thereon, I'm not sure.
> >
> > Applications are already launched from a wrapper within lashd (what it
> > terms the "loader".)  It calls fork() and exec().  The only thing that
> > needs to be done is to change stdout and stderr to point to a log file
> > after calling fork() and before calling exec().  The appropriate place
> > for the file would be the application's directory under the project
> > directory.
> 
> Not just that, I want to know what app outputed what. If their out goes
> to common log file, we need prefixing.

Each connected LASH client has its own directory under the main LASH
project directory.  By redirecting each client's output to a file in its
client-specific directory, there would be no common log file.

Bob

-- 
Bob Ham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Reply via email to