Re: Default on failure dependencies

[Lennart Poettering <lennart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mo, 08.10.18 09:58, Jérémy Rosen (jeremy.rosen@xxxxxxxx) wrote:

> 
> > This all makes me wonder whether a different approach to all of this
> > wouldn't be better: maybe we should just consider this a logging
> > problem: let's make sure we log a recognizable log message (i.e. a
> > structured journal message with a well-defined MESSAGE_ID=) whenever a
> > service fails. With that in place it should be relatively easy to
> > write a system service that can run during regular system uptime and
> > can look in the journal for all failures, including getting live
> > notifications when something happens. Moreover, this resolves the
> > problems during early and late boot: the "cursor" logic of the journal
> > allows such a service to know exactly which failures it already
> > processed and which ones are still left, and it can process all
> > failures that took place while it was not running.
> > 
> > Does that make sense?
> 
> Could this be generalized to "a structured message whenever a unit changes
> state" or would that be too verbose ?

We have that already but only in debug logging mode (systemd-analyze
log-level debug). It's a bit too much noise to turn on by default otherwise...

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel