[pacman-dev] scritplet output logging removed?

[Dan McGee]

On Nov 5, 2007 1:18 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/4/07, Xavier <shiningxc at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 08:41:07AM -0500, Dan McGee wrote:
> > > On 10/18/07, Xavier <shiningxc at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I just saw this was removed by commit ad691001e :
> > > > "Remove scriptlet START and DONE commands that we don't use"
> > > >
> > > > Since the comment doesn't mention the logging, I just want to make sure this
> > > > was intended and not overlooked.
> > >
> > > Hmm, another good catch. It looks like I did remove the logging
> > > unintentionally. I guess we need to incorporate that back in.
> > >
> > > HOWEVER, I'd like to hear opinions on this. I always thought it was a
> > > dirty hack to throw this stuff to pacman.log, which previously was a
> > > very clean and machine-parseable log file. Its now a big steaming pile
> > > of crap, in my opinion. I propose that we log these messages to a
> > > separate file, with some date stamps incorporated. Any objections?
> > >
> >
> > I only saw today that the scriptlet logging wasn't always safe, and that
> > removing it actually fixed a bug :
> > http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/7117#comment18667
> >
> > I thought this was worth mentionning, because if this scriptlet logging was
> > ever reimplemented, it should probably deal with the %s issue.
>
> Yeah, Jeff was working on this - I explicitly asked him to use puts()
> for scriptlet lines, and NOT printf(). Though, now that I think of it,
> we should do the same with _alpm_logaction (using fputs())

I already fixed the lack of logging in GIT, although it is just doing
what it used to do for now, which is not what I want it to do in the
future (log to pacman.log). And there is no need to use puts/fputs if
you just use a format string correctly: printf("%s", stringtoprint)
instead of printf(stringtoprint), as far as I know.

-Dan