Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Lennart Poettering > <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > We can meet in the middle and make this LOG_NOTICE. That's not the > > usual LOG_INFO, but also not the higher LOG_WARNING. > > Just to verify: I assume you mean that the killing of these processes > would normally emit a "LOG_NOTICE". message. Do I understand correctly that KillUserProcesses is meant to be a safety net to catch processes that should have terminated when the user logged out, but failed to do so? In that case each killed process should be logged on the error level, not notice, because it's not a normal event. It's a defect in the program that it failed to terminate cleanly, and to draw attention to the defect and get it fixed, it should be logged as an error. Or is KillUserProcesses meant to become the normal way of ending a user session? Are programs supposed to start relying on receiving a TERM signal from SystemD to tell them that the user has logged out? In that case it's a perfectly normal an uninteresting event, and the processes shouldn't be logged by default on any level higher than debug – but if a process fails to terminate and gets a KILL, then it should be logged on the error level, because – again – it's a defect in the program that it failed to terminate on the TERM signal. > Also to be clear: What about having an alternative "WARNING" setting > for UserKillProcess, one that would generate a log message but not > actually kill processes? That will certainly be needed during the transition, and when that setting is in effect, then it seems reasonable to log on the notice level. Björn Persson
Attachment:
pgpE4uBqDJexT.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
