[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything
From: |
Kenneth Loafman |
Subject: |
Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay? |
Date: |
Wed, 25 Mar 2009 07:12:07 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090318) |
Edgar Soldin wrote:
>> I think the log level should be moved down to 3 (default) on this one.
>> Opinions?
>>
>
> Didn't Michael kind of name the log levels or tried at least? .. kind of
> warning, info, debug ...
> online man page states
> -->
>
> *-v*/[0-9]/*, --verbosity */[0-9]/
> Specify verbosity level (0 is total silent, 3 is the default, and 9
> is noisiest).
> <--
>
> This should be more detailled. If somebody gives me an overview I could
> think of a more detailed description for the manpage.
Here are the current log levels:
logging.addLevelName(DupToLoggerLevel(0), "ERROR")
logging.addLevelName(DupToLoggerLevel(1), "WARNING")
logging.addLevelName(DupToLoggerLevel(2), "WARNING")
logging.addLevelName(DupToLoggerLevel(3), "NOTICE")
logging.addLevelName(DupToLoggerLevel(4), "NOTICE")
logging.addLevelName(DupToLoggerLevel(5), "INFO")
logging.addLevelName(DupToLoggerLevel(6), "INFO")
logging.addLevelName(DupToLoggerLevel(7), "INFO")
logging.addLevelName(DupToLoggerLevel(8), "INFO")
logging.addLevelName(DupToLoggerLevel(9), "DEBUG")
> address@hidden .. do the --log-* commands interpret the -v switch or
> do they always put out -v9 ?
The symbolic names are used internally a bit, but still mostly numeric.
I have not had the time to go through the code and make it all
symbolic, i.e. use Log.Info(), Log.Warning(), etc.
The default is set to NOTICE, but only level 3-->0 are output which
shows that we probably need to adjust logging to get 4 to show also.
...Ken
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, (continued)
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Josh, 2009/03/24
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Kenneth Loafman, 2009/03/24
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Josh, 2009/03/24
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Kenneth Loafman, 2009/03/24
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Josh, 2009/03/24
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Kenneth Loafman, 2009/03/24
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Maurizio Vitale, 2009/03/24
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Richard Scott, 2009/03/25
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Kenneth Loafman, 2009/03/25
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Edgar Soldin, 2009/03/25
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?,
Kenneth Loafman <=
- Loglevels and Output ... WAS: Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals?, Edgar Soldin, 2009/03/25
- Re: Loglevels and Output ... WAS: Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals?, Michael Terry, 2009/03/27
- Re: Loglevels and Output ... WAS: Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals?, edgar . soldin, 2009/03/30
- Re: Loglevels and Output ... WAS: Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals?, Michael Terry, 2009/03/30
- Re: Loglevels and Output ... WAS: Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals?, Kenneth Loafman, 2009/03/30
- Re: Loglevels and Output ... WAS: Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals?, Michael Terry, 2009/03/30
- Re: Loglevels and Output ... WAS: Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals?, Kenneth Loafman, 2009/03/30
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Josh, 2009/03/25
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Josh, 2009/03/25
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] erroneous incrementals? verify failing? everything else seems okay?, Kenneth Loafman, 2009/03/25