From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 13 06:55:24 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0CF516A4DD for ; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 06:55:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com) Received: from mail.bitblocks.com (bitblocks.com [209.204.185.216]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E4CB43D45 for ; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 06:55:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com) Received: from bitblocks.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.bitblocks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA1042948D; Sat, 12 Aug 2006 23:55:23 -0700 (PDT) To: Julian Elischer In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 12 Aug 2006 20:02:04 PDT." <44DE962C.7050402@elischer.org> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 23:55:23 -0700 From: Bakul Shah Message-Id: <20060813065523.CA1042948D@mail.bitblocks.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: suggested addition to 'date' X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 06:55:24 -0000 > Who's messing with date? it acts as before except if you need to > annotate a stream with timestamps.. I understand what you are saying; just don't agree with you that date(1) is the right place to make this change. Particularly as it is not a filter. > Now puting it in logger.. THAT is an unintuitive program to make into a > date adding filter. Your original intention was to timestamp lines in a logfile. What better program than logger(1) for that? And logger already accepts data on stdin. > logger's job is to send data to the syslog system, which already date > stamps things. > It is not designed to be a filter but it already takes file input and > outputs to stderr. Which is why I said extend logger if you must. Or a separate date-filter program. > I really can't believe the people who are complaining about this.. I > should have just committed it. A disagreement is not a complaint. > Talk about a bikeshed! We are saying don't even build the bikeshed :-) In any case *you* asked for our feedback. At least consider the feedback without impugning our motives.