Bob Ham <rah@email-addr-hidden> writes:
> On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 18:56 +0200, Juuso Alasuutari wrote:
>> On Tuesday 22 January 2008 15:39:20 Nedko Arnaudov wrote:
>
>> Capturing the clients' debug messages would indeed be helpful. How do you
>> think it should be handled?
>
>> Idiot-proof capturing of stdout/err could probably only work if the client
>> process was executed from a wrapper. It could be accomplished with the D-Bus
>> service file, though. If all clients' service files would be mandated to
>> include something like "Exec=/usr/bin/lash_exec /usr/bin/foobar", then...
>> Umm, at least we could redirect the streams _somewhere_ -- but what to do
>> from thereon, I'm not sure.
>
> Applications are already launched from a wrapper within lashd (what it
> terms the "loader".) It calls fork() and exec(). The only thing that
> needs to be done is to change stdout and stderr to point to a log file
> after calling fork() and before calling exec(). The appropriate place
> for the file would be the application's directory under the project
> directory.
Not just that, I want to know what app outputed what. If their out goes
to common log file, we need prefixing.
This log file is not bound just to session, lashd itself does output.
-- Nedko Arnaudov <GnuPG KeyID: DE1716B0>
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jan 23 2008 - 04:15:20 EET