GNU bug report logs - #68946
[RFC PATCH 0/1] Add logging capability to Guix

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>

Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 04:15:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 68946 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>, Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>, Josselin Poiret <dev <at> jpoiret.xyz>, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>, Christopher Baines <guix <at> cbaines.net>
Subject: [bug#68946] [PATCH v2] guix: Add logging module.
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 20:13:33 -0500
Hi Ludovic,

Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:

> Hi!
>
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> * configure.ac: Require Guile-Lib.
>> * guix/logging.scm: New module.
>> * Makefile.am (MODULES): Register it.
>> * guix/ui.scm (show-guix-help): Document --log-level global option.
>> (%log-level): New parameter.
>> (run-guix-command): Init logging.
>> (run-guix): Parse new --log-level option.
>>
>> Change-Id: I5026a0d62119615fec3cd0131309f9bcc346a7e9
>
> Two quick notes: I think it’s be best to avoid depending on Guile-Lib
> “just” for this (it’s not clear to me what it’s maintenance status is),
> and it’d be great to have concrete use case.

David Pirotte is doing great for Guile-Lib maintenance.  It's better
maintained, than say, Guile-Git, which we also depend on :-).  It has a
good test suite and is small.  We already depend on it for a couple of
our updaters, for its htmlprag HTML parser, so combined with this log
facility, that seems enough to justify hard depending on it.

> My concern with logging is that it’s not a good fit for the functional
> parts (unless it has a functional interface like ‘pk’, but that’s still
> sorta “cluttering” otherwise functional code), and I’m not sure which
> imperative part it could be used for (I don’t doubt there’s such a
> thing, but I lack imagination).

I understand the concern, but I think to be able to trace execution
easily at run time with a simple `--log-level=debug' would provide value
enough (as a developer aid) to justify it.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim




This bug report was last modified 209 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.