Don's argument for stderr over stdout makes sense to me. Does anyone else disagree?
-John- On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Don Provan <dprovan at bivio.net> wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Ousterhout [mailto:ouster at cs.stanford.edu] > > Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 9:30 AM > > To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com> > > Cc: dev at dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] log: respect rte_openlog_stream calls > > before rte_eal_init > > > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Thomas Monjalon > > <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com> > > wrote: > > > I don't know either. > > > What is best between stdout and stderr for logs? > > > > I would guess that stdout makes more sense, since most log entries > describe > > normal operation, not errors. I'm happy to make these consistent, but > this > > would introduce a behavior change for BSD (which currently uses stderr); > > would that be considered antisocial? > > I've never seen a pronouncement or anything, but as a linux programmer, > my attitude is that stdout should be the output the application is > producing > when carrying out its function. Debugging output isn't part of what the > application is trying to accomplish, so it should be sent to stderr where > it > can be segregated from the functional output when needed. > -don > dprovan at bivio.net > >
