On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:18:07AM +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 11:07:30PM -0400, Dan Lavu wrote:
> > I've been watching various logs for the past few minutes, FWIW, I think a
> > more casual message will help people better understand what SSSD is doing.
> > Look at debug level 4, the first instance of a user name look up (getent
> > passwd dlavu) a common command we tell folks to test to see if SSSD is
> > working
> >
> > (Mon Jun 29 22:10:59 2015) [sssd[be[lab.runlevelone.lan]]]
> > [be_get_account_info] (0x0200): Got request for [0x1001][1][name=dlavu]
> >
> > Just imagine if you knew nothing about SSSD and how it worked, what can you
> > gather from this line of text? Timestamp, process, domain,
> > get_account_info, got_request and userid and the rest is sort of gibberish
> > and what is the difference between be_get_account_info and got_request_for?
> > I think it's confusing, now looking at some other logs messages.
>
> What is missing in the list of components above is '(0x0200)' which is
> the debug_level. We recently had a number of questions about messages
> from a high debug level which in general have an information character,
> but since it not easy to identify the level of the message it was
> considered as an error message. Maybe it would be good to have a some
> translations here as well to make it easier to separate errors from
> infos.
Do you mean printing the level as string, so that instead of:
[sssd[be[lab.runlevelone.lan]]] [be_get_account_info] (0x0200): Got request
for [0x1001][1][name=dlavu]
we would have:
[sssd[be[lab.runlevelone.lan]]] [be_get_account_info] (SSSDBG_FUNC_DATA):
Got request for [0x1001][1][name=dlavu]
?
If yes, then I agree. But at the same time, I think it's more irritating
that so many debug levels (mainly those that were mass-converted) are
misplaced.
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
