Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC/PATCH] Documentation of kernel messages | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Date | Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:36:22 -0700 |
| |
On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 15:53 +0200, holzheu wrote: > On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 06:12 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 14:55 +0200, holzheu wrote: > > > Hi Gerrit, > > > > > > The common thing of your and our approach is, that we need an ID to > > > identify a message either by: > > > > > > Maybe I am missing something big, but why is an ID needed? > > The message IS the ID right? That's the only thing that is robust > > against code moving about.... > > Yes. As already discussed with Pavel, it is one option to use the format > string of the message as message ID. The disadvantage compared to > message IDs like hashes is, that format strings might be even less > unique than hashes
if the hash comes from the string in the first place I have a hard time believing that.
> and it's probably less convenient for searching by > operators.
I'm not convinced of that...
> > An operator has to issue either: > > >> info lp.4711 > or > >> info "lp0: on fire"
well.... surely the messages are caught by some userspace program, right? (like syslog).. that can do the lookup and make it all conveniently lookup-able and cross-referencable etc etc....
-- if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com Test the interaction between Linux and your BIOS via http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.org
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |