|
|
|
Home » U++ Library support » U++ Core » LOG files in ~/.App-name/logs/date.log in Linux
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: LOG files in ~/.App-name/logs/date.log in Linux [message #8039 is a reply to message #6412] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 18:38   |
ebojd
Messages: 225
Registered: January 2007
Location: USA
|
Experienced Member |
|
|
Hmmm... Here are some thoughts.
Placing the files in ~/.App-name/... clutters up the home directory, and more importantly if you have multiple versions of the same app, it will overwrite the logs. Ex: I have an assemblage named LIDAR_apps which contains supposedly working versions of the packages, and LIDAR_exp for experimental versions of the same code. Later, as I release specific versions, I was planning on renaming the assemblages to something like LIDAR_apps_001, etc. I'm still trying to decide the best way to handle specific version support for U++ packages. What is the U++ convention for handling application versioning?
My $0.02 would be to place the logs in a sub directory of the package itself, add a new build menu item "clean logs" below "clean package", and possibly add a couple of check boxes in debug for creating logs, etc... Like I said, just my $0.02
|
|
|
|
| Re: LOG files in ~/.App-name/logs/date.log in Linux [message #8058 is a reply to message #8039] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 23:04 |
 |
mirek
Messages: 13975
Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
| ebojd wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 12:38 |
My $0.02 would be to place the logs in a sub directory of the package itself, add a new build menu item "clean logs" below "clean package", and possibly add a couple of check boxes in debug for creating logs, etc... Like I said, just my $0.02
|
No, placing intermediate files to directory sources is something we are trying to avoid hard.
Anyway, perhaps now, when we have GetExeDirFile more or less working, we could simply place them in output directory (where binary resides), just like in Win32. It would not just work well for release version, but release versions do not make .logs anyway.
Alternative is to move them one level down, e.g. into ~/.upp.log directory.
And then maybe, it could be output directory for debug and ~/.upp.log for release.
(That said, I do not like so much .* subdirs in my ~ too... 
Mirek
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: LOG files in ~/.App-name/logs/date.log in Linux [message #8064 is a reply to message #8063] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 23:30 |
|
mirek
Messages: 13975
Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
| ebojd wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 17:23 |
> No, placing intermediate files to directory sources is
> something we are trying to avoid hard.
fair enough. After pointing this out I very much agree with you 
the linux default is to make a copy of the sources and build in $(USER)/upp. how about a directory named log which is a sibling of out directory (ie $(USER)/upp/logs)? That way we do not have to make a seperate directory in home or root.
|
Actually, I believe I suggest something similar for release version.
The advantage of putting debug into output directory is that there is nice well defined "Open output directory file" function in TheIDE.
BTW, placing in ~/upp/logs has slight disadvantage as that directory is not well defined during execution of binary, it is just compilation issue.
| Quote: |
BTW, I'm looking forward to the day I learn u++ enough that I can actually contribute instead of wasting your time.
|
That is OK, you are not wasting my time. Actually, this one problem is the kind that can be implemented in 2 minutes, but takes months to decide what is the correct behaviour.... Brainstorming is highly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Apr 19 15:31:40 CEST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03352 seconds
|
|
|
Members
Pages
Help
Register
Login
Home
