Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 18:45:20 -0500 From: Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reducing noise in dmesg output Message-ID: <2fd864e0909021645p735e22b8id7d41f4b5a0ee89e@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200909021656.15747.nick@van-laarhoven.org> References: <200909010931.16880.nick@van-laarhoven.org> <1251841416.1689.4458.camel@balrog.2hip.net> <200909021656.15747.nick@van-laarhoven.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Nick Hibma<nick@van-laarhoven.org> wrote: >> What is irrelevant is subjective... =A0I mean does the average user real= ly >> need to see anything in dmesg? =A0Please don't change agp_i810.c. =A0A >> verbose boot is incredibly noisy and rarely needed for debugging >> anything except the most deep rooted of issues. > > Please state arguments instead of this 'I think it is useful'. That's not > going to cut it. If you feel strongly about the info that is being produc= ed, > an option would be to produce a (tested!) patch that combines more > information on one line as a compromise. > > FreeBSD has historically been producing very limited output on dmesg. Lin= ux > is very noisy (ever noticed the copyright notices right in the middle of > your list of PCI devices?). Even they have decided that they should hide > this behind coloured 'ok/failed' texts in some distributions. > > FreeBSD has slowly been producing more and more output (most notably the = USB > subsystem up to 7.x) and I am intending to remove that clutter again, or = at > least compress it. > > Being swamped with information reduces its value rather than increase it. > > Nick I think this speaks more towards needing something between "Very Quiet" and "Give me everything every developer has ever wanted to know enough to include a print for it." --- Harrison
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2fd864e0909021645p735e22b8id7d41f4b5a0ee89e>