On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 07:53:41PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 06:15:35PM +0200, Sumit Bose wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 05:57:32PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > > > 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 > > > > yes, that's what I meant, but maybe we should not use the internal > > macros here, but something more explicit like ERR_CRIT, ERR_FUNC, > > INF_CONFIG, INF_DATA, TRACE_... to make it more obvious what the message > > might be about. > > Yes, sure. Care to file a ticket? :-)
It's https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2808 . Please add ideas and suggestions how those tags shall look like. bye, Sumit > > > > > > that so many debug levels (mainly those that were mass-converted) are > > > misplaced. > > > > of course, but maybe having the level spelled out will help to identify > > the ones that are misplaced more easy? > > Yes, it would be easier to read a word than a hexa number. We could > even colorize the output when running interactively :-) > > What we can also do easily and with relatively low effort is to > select a couple of the most common usage patterns like: > * login with the correct password, online and offline > * login with wrong password > * run sudo > * change password > * .... > > And make sure they don't print any messages with debug_level <= 3. > _______________________________________________ > sssd-devel mailing list > sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
