Re: lirc 0.10

Alec Leamas <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.hardware.lirc
Message-ID <[email protected]>

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
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.