| 1 |
Michał Górny posted on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 07:47:06 +0100 as excerpted: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 22:48:08 -0600 Ryan Hill <rhill@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 15:35:12 +0100 Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> |
| 6 |
>> wrote: |
| 7 |
>> > On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 14:37:41 +0100 "Justin Lecher (jlec)" |
| 8 |
>> > <jlec@g.o> wrote: |
| 9 |
>> > > On 15/02/16 13:59, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
>> > > > Don't mix echo with ewarn. |
| 12 |
>> > > Why? |
| 13 |
>> > Because they won't go through the same output channels. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> That's kinda the point. You want a blank (unstarred) space to separate |
| 16 |
>> out the "important" messages from the generic spew put out by the |
| 17 |
>> package manager/eclasses/build system that you have no control over. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> This is not just that. Different output channels mean that: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> - There is no guarantee of correct output order! The empty lines may |
| 22 |
> move randomly over the text. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Good point! (Of course the others are too, but this one could be |
| 25 |
particularly damaging to the intended communication.) |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
>> If you have several different messages you want a blank space in |
| 28 |
>> between them so you can use e* to create whitespace within the message |
| 29 |
>> to avoid the wall of text syndrome while still making it clear where it |
| 30 |
>> begins and ends. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
>> You're right that using echo means the whitespace doesn't get saved by |
| 33 |
>> the elog system. A while back someone proposed we add espace for |
| 34 |
>> exactly this reason but IIRC they were laughed down, which is a shame. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> So... to summarize your point. You shouldn't use the correct function |
| 37 |
> that is saved in elog which is primary way of getting info because you |
| 38 |
> find it more convenient to have empty non-'starred' lines that don't |
| 39 |
> actually get to elog and make elog a mess? |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> If you really don't like empty 'starred' lines (and I actually like them |
| 42 |
> since they make separation between packages cleaner), why not submit a |
| 43 |
> patch for Portage and make 'elog' with no arguments output log line |
| 44 |
> without a star? That's a trivial solution that doesn't require extra |
| 45 |
> functions for the sake of inventing elogspace, ewarnspace, ... |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
It is at least possible to use say blank ewarn between elog lines, or the |
| 48 |
reverse, so while there's no totally blank separator, there's at least a |
| 49 |
different color to the star on the starred-blank-line separator. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Similarly, if there's more than one "topic" to the messages, and they're |
| 52 |
of different severity, the severities can be interspersed to get color |
| 53 |
separation. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
I believe I've seen both techniques used to good effect in a few packages |
| 56 |
in the past, but I can't name any off the top of my head. |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
-- |
| 59 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 60 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 61 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives