On 05/18/2013 01:11 AM, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 10:13:46AM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: >> On 05/13/2013 12:30 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>> From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <[email protected]> >>> >>> Even with the -q flag specified, tracing output is still mixed >>> with messages about signals and process exit status, which is >>> often irrelevant. Allow the -q flag to be repeated to force >>> the suppression of signals / exit status info too. >> >> I would say that this is a bit arbitrary to think >> that signals are "not relevant". In many cases, >> they are! >> >> The suppression done by -q was suppressing messages about >> what _strace_ does, those messages had nothing to do with >> _what happens to the traced process_. >> >> Your new addition suppressed signal delivery log messages, >> and that is something which _does happen to the process_ >> being traced. >> >> Also, your addition is unnecessary because "-e signal=!all" >> does the same thing. > > What about exit status info? The only way to suppress this kind > of messages before the patch was -c option.
That makes sense. So, should we remove signal suppression by -qq. Your opinion? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_may _______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
