Re: lirc 0.10

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lirc 0.10

Alec Leamas


On 07/06/17 16:46, Piotr Oniszczuk wrote:
> Alec,
> One thing i don't get:
> In syslog I see:
>
> Jun 7 11:27:03 (none) local0.notice lircd-0.10.0-devel[4666]: Notice:
> System info: Linux FE-Sleepingroom 4.11.3 #1 SMP Tue Jun 6 21:29:43 CEST
> 2017 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>

[cut]

>
> I see log level: Info.
>
> In syslog then I see however flood of:
>
> Jun 7 11:29:59 (none) local0.notice lircd-0.10.0-devel[4714]: Notice:
> accepted new client on /var/run/lirc/lircd
> Jun 7 11:29:59 (none) user.debug irsend: lirc_command_run: Sending:
> SEND_ONCE Samsung_UE40C5000 tv_vol+
> Jun 7 11:29:59 (none) user.debug irsend: lirc_command_run, state: 0,
> input: "BEGIN"
> Jun 7 11:29:59 (none) user.debug irsend: lirc_command_run, state: 1,
> input: "SEND_ONCE Samsung_UE40C5000 tv_vol+"
> Jun 7 11:29:59 (none) user.debug irsend: lirc_command_run, state: 2,
> input: "SUCCESS"
> Jun 7 11:29:59 (none) user.debug irsend: lirc_command_run, state: 3,
> input: "END"
> Jun 7 11:29:59 (none) user.notice irsend: lirc_command_run: data:END,
> status:0
> Jun 7 11:29:59 (none) user.debug irsend: lirc_command_run: Sending:

[cut]

> this output looks to me like debug level output.

> In lirc_client.c sources i see L:225
>
> <------><------>logprintf(LIRC_DEBUG,
> <------><------><------>  "lirc_command_run, state: %d, input: \"%s\"\n",
> <------><------><------>  state, string ? string : "(Null)");
>
> so this should be effective when loglevel is DEBUG.
> but lirc statrtup reports I have loglevel INFO
>
> Do I miss something or loglevel isn't correctly propagated to lircclient?


"Correctly" isn't really the proper term here. The irsend logging is
completely independent of lircd; lircclient does not forward the loglevel.

Other applications have separate ways to define the loglevel using a
command line option plus a chain of default values. However, for some
reason this is missing for irsend. Filing a bug on this might be a good
idea.

Adding a way to forward the lircd loglevel to lircclient might be an
other idea, for sure

All this said, the current behaviour is as expected.


Cheers!

--alec

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot