lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Jun]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: Ideas for v2.1
    Date
    From
    > > > >It would a simple matter to _NOT_ log escape sequences, since
    > > > >printk would already have to detect them in the first place.
    > > > >The escape code just shouldn't be put in the buffer.
    > > >
    > > > No, it would probably be quite tricky.
    > >
    > > I _STRONGLY_ don't agree (but that is good isn't it? :-)
    >
    > Hey, me too! =:^)
    >
    > > printk _KNOWS_ what sequences it can handle, and can _easily_
    > > be told to not log other sequences.
    > >
    > > Example: "Hello %E3[K4world%E3[K2\n" (note: bogus esc seqences)
    > > %En could be defined as meaning an escape sequence of length n.
    >
    > Absolutely not. That's unnecessary.
    >
    > We can safely assume that all escape sequences used in the kernel messages
    > will be standard ANSI X3.64 stuff. The most common, most useful X3.64
    > escape sequences (if not all of them) begin with escape, and end with a
    > character with bit 6 set. So a piece-of-cake little two- or three-state
    > machine could easily pull escape sequences out before logging. Or we could
    > do it at userlevel with something like awk (or sed, to appease Olaf Kirch
    > =:^) )

    Neat - i didn't know about this bit 6 thing.

    > Anyway, doesn't %E conflict with a printf token?

    Likely. I just "threw it out there" as an example.

    --
    Andrew E. Mileski
    mailto:aem@ott.hookup.net My home page http://www.redhat.com/~aem/
    Linux Plug-and-Play Project Leader. See URL http://www.redhat.com/pnp/

    Red Hat Software sponsors these pages - I have no other affilitation
    with Red Hat Software, and I have never used any of their products.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.019 / U:0.596 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site