Re: [PATCH 4/4] dts: log stderr with failed remote commands

["Juraj Linkeš" <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>]

On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 8:19 PM Luca Vizzarro <Luca.Vizzarro@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 29/01/2024 13:10, Juraj Linkeš wrote:
> > Here's I'd add logged additionally as an error, as this sounds as if
> > we're changing debug to error
>
> That is also a way of doing this, but an error is an error. If we wanted
> to log the same thing in debug and error, then when we go read the debug
> we get duplicates... making it less readable. What do you say?
>

I meant let's change the commit message wording to better reflect what
the patch does - it adds stderr to the exception, not doing something
instead of logging it as debug (it could be understood this way). But
it doesn't really matter much. Maybe a better wording of the second
sentence would be "So that, instead of logging it just as debug, it is
also stored in an error, ."

> > I'd change the order here (and all other places) so that stderr is
> > before the return code.
> Ack.
>
> > We should mention that the last string is the stderr output. Maybe we
> > just add 'Stderr:' before {self._command_stderr}. And maybe we should
> > put quotes around {self._command_stderr}.
>
> Since you mentioned "quotes", I'd think that it'd be even better to
> indent it as if it's a quote. With logs as busy as the ones DTS prints,
> adding some quotes may not change much as it's all already very crowded.
> Can prefix with 'Stderr: ' though.

The prefix is essential so that we know what the output actually is.
Indenting it sounds great.