Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: Ideas for v2.1 | Date | Fri, 14 Jun 1996 17:54:07 -0400 (EDT) | From | "Andrew E. Mileski" <> |
| |
> > > >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.
|  |