Question about nALFS' file logging functions

Gerard Beekmans gerard at
Thu Oct 10 08:57:22 PDT 2002

On October 9, 2002 07:57 pm, Neven Has wrote:
> Another problem with logging the current <stage> is how to name the
> files themselves.

I always name installation logs according to the package name that I'm 
installing. But yes I see the difficulty if we're logging non-packages.

> We could add "description" attribute, and then have a simple, one word
> long "name". That name could be then used as a file name, with some
> random suffix (which I hate BTW, but it's easy and safe).

Maybe more to the point and easier to understand: use a logfile attribute
If no "logfile" attribute present, don't log?

> And logging aside, it's always good to have some unique identifier,
> maybe for some other purposes in the future.

I can see where it might be useful though I haven't been using it. I run a 
script on nALFS' logfiles, remove all that have $LFS/static/ in them and the 
rest are renamed by removing the .files.xxxxxx extension from it. Just 
personal no reason to do it though. Now I wanted to look at just the static 
installation logs I now have to build a list using grep first to find out 
which files I want. If the filename had a clearer indication, like by passing 
that logfile attribute (<stage blah logfile="bash-2.05.static">) I could 
easier get just the files I want. Similarly one would be able to categorize 
the installation logs, such as chapter5 static installations, chapter 6 
packages, chapter 6 config files (the config-*.xml files).

Gerard Beekmans

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list