From: Fabian K. <fre...@fa...> - 2008-11-20 08:48:52
|
Lee <le...@gm...> wrote: > On 11/17/08, Fabian Keil <fre...@fa...> wrote: > > Lee <le...@gm...> wrote: > > > >> On 11/16/08, Fabian Keil <fre...@fa...> wrote: > >> > Lee <le...@gm...> wrote: > >> We've talked about it before - you like the crunch info at the end & I > >> like it first. eg: > >> Privoxy(00000338) Request: crunch! (Blocked) > >> cp20.com/Tracking/t.o?21 > > > > I don't really need a "crunch!" at the end, it's just > > that I find "crunch! (crunch reason) URL" hard to read. > > I do too. But I like having the (crunch reason) right there at the > beginning of the line. We can probably do that if we remove the parentheses (and maybe reword some of the crunch reasons). I'll look into that. > > Maybe it would be even worth it to give crunches > > their own log level and use something like: > > Privoxy(00000338) Crunched: example.org/foo (Blocked) > > I'm missing how that would help.. The reason why the URL was crunched > is still at the end of the line & not visible if it's a long URL. If > blocks could get their own log level - say something like: > Privoxy(00000338) Blocked: example.org/foo > that would be great. I don't see an easy way of doing that though :( To do that we'd have to pass the crunch reasons as log level. I think there are enough free bits available, but I'm not sure it'll be worth it. Using: Privoxy(00000338) Crunched: Blocked: example.org/foo Would have the advantage that one could still easily grep for all crunches without having to remember all the reasons. While we're talking about log messages: Would anyone object if I removed the strings "Privoxy(" and ")" around the thread id? I my opinion they waste space without offering any information. Privoxy-Log-Parser removes them by default so it's not a big issue for me, but I think removing them would benefit mingw32 users as well. Fabian |