bit-team
Option for Timestamps for each Log entry, with date and seconds included
Describe the problem, feature or ask a question:
i want to have timestamps per every log entry, yyyy-MM-DD_HH;mm;ss.
sometimes logs continue from previous attempt, which can be days ago or even more depending on the situation. and sometimes a process can take a very long time, due to many errors etc for example.
i know these timestamps can be very spammy sometimes and some people don't want it. but some [like me] very much do, so i would love the option to enable something like that in the settings.
i assumed it isn't the case, but if its something on rsync level please let me know about it, so i can forward what is needed on their side in their github, thank you ^^ .
Hello zxzzz8,
Thank you for taking the time to report the issue. I appreciate your feedback, will investigate the issue, and work on a solution to the best of my ability.
I've noticed you use all lowercase. Proper capitalization improves readability and is gentle to the eyes of your readers. In English, capital letters are used at the beginning of sentences, for the word "I", and for proper nouns. It would be nice and helpful if you could consider that in your next messages.
To your issue. If you are referring to the applications log, you can see timestamp in syslog/systemd/journalctl. Please see our FAQ about how to read that log.
If you refer to the backup profile log (aka: snapshot log) there is currently no way to have a per-line-timestamp. I don't know if rsync is capable of that. Please consult the rsync manpage and their community. Let me know if you find a solution.
If you have any more details to share, feel free to reach out.
Please see the projects background information to get an idea about our workflow and priorities:
Best regards, Christian
After looking a bit more, I think its "--log-file-format=FORMAT" , and its "%t = the current date time" specifically, So it should be written along in addition to the default format, so it doesn't replace it.
With that being said, I think it would be nice if you could just directly edit the complete log formal in BiT settings UI, and have the log-format options show in mouse-over like other option guides do in there. ( I specifically found the "%t" in here https://linux.die.net/man/5/rsyncd.conf )
\OFF-TOPIC/ You said "Proper capitalization improves readability and is gentle to the eyes of your readers.", but that depends on who. As Im sure many actually don't feel that way you said, and some would even have it completely the other way around (Myself included), As capslock letters can be taken as a highlighter yell of sorts, and can be obstructive to some, as it should be usually used only for a "yelling reason/tone", and not in regular sentences without a particular reason. Or at least in casual Internet-English (as opposed to official type US/UK-English), which is the more global choice usually as well (between people), as far as i see it.
And thats not even accounting for something being obstructive to write, meaning "putting aside reading it".
That being said, I can try to accommodate your Personal/Cultural preference here in this case. Even if its very obstructive to me to try to write like that, And Idk if I even did it correctly or not, but I tried this time at least XD
And btw have great day, ^^ zx.
Hello zx,
thank you for your reply.
I think its "--log-file-format=FORMAT"
Nice to know. To my knowledge BIT doesn't use that option. Sou you can set it yourself. Please have a look in the Expert Options tab of the Manage profiles dialog. There you will find a field Paste additional options to rsync.
Might this solve your case?
\OFF-TOPIC/ You said "Proper capitalization ... As Im sure many actually don't feel that way you said, and some would even have it completely the other way around (Myself included)
This is not about feelings but about neurological patterns and rules. When writing Japanese I also try to accomplish their rules and not mine.
As capslock letters can be taken as a highlighter yell
One letter only is not yelling.
That being said, I can try to accommodate your Personal/Cultural preference here in this case.
These are not "my personal preferences". It is just English.
But thank you for widen my horizon. I was not aware that this writing behavior could be explained (reasoned?) with feelings.
Regards, Christian
I also didn't find anything about such a feature, which is why I opened this issue as a [Feature Req'] rather then a [Question], so that there will be record of user-demand for this feature as unresolved/unimplemented = 'Open', For any devs now or in the future wanting to contribute to the project and want to know what features are asked but haven't been implemented yet, At least thats how opensource projects works (as far as I understand), So if the current maintenance team doesn't want to bother implementing this, please just leave this issue 'Open', so that other devs outside the active team that wish to contribute, can see this was not implemented, Thank you.
As for what you suggested with the Expert-Options, I did see that before, So what I need to write there is "--log-file-format=lq%t %o %h [%a] %m (%u) %f %lrq" ? Meaning %t + whats suppose to be the default, inside the lqrq? did I do all this correctly? (This is so human error prone I feel, exactly one of the reasons why I want this feature req' to begin with, at least as a simple checkmark for "timestamps in logs").
\Off Topic/
As I always like to say, "Language is defined by those who use it, NOT by any dictionary", To emphasis, a baby doesn't learn a language from a dictionary, they learn it from how those around them use it. After all languages came long before any dictionary existed, And dictionaries, and the rules they provide, are only an endless attempt to chase the meaning of the actual way people use(>and thus Define as they use) a language.
To begin with, many languages are originally branches of other languages, as they were used differently overtime or over different communities, In other words any language have many deviations if you will, at least to some extent, with every community or era, True it might be happening less and slower in this era where internet is around to regularly exchange information a lot more, but it sure Does still happens, thus there is never really something simple like "just English"
These are not "my personal preferences". It is just English.
Is it US-English? UK-English? or Internet-English like what i was referring to earlier? which culture of English is your personal preference, thats what i meant. There is ALWAYS a "Personal/Cultural" preference, and to not realize this can cause miscommunications, let alone unnecessary arguments on "whats right", when a language is clearly a dynamic thing that change with time or with which community.
Thats exactly why i said before:
Or at least in casual Internet-English (as opposed to official type US/UK-English), which is the more global choice usually as well (between people), as far as i see it.
After all, i assume Internet-English, while surely have many branches within it as well, is generally more spoken by non-English natives (as in a different default language in their homeland) then it is by English-natives, thus Internet-English is more Defined/Affected by non-EN-natives as well, So naturally it will be different in many ways from US-English and other English branches of English native countries.
This is not about feelings but about neurological patterns and rules.
I already wrote earlier about the rules & dictionaries part, As for the other, are those "neurological patterns" you refer to are about EN-natives? but that isn't exactly going to be true for non-EN-natives necessarily, and thus not necessarily relevant for Internet-English and its community that uses it (and define it) as well.
I apologize if I wasn't clear enough before about this.
Now that i think about it btw, when there is some auto-correction that try to put capital letters at the start of my sentences etc', I usually take the extra effort to go after it and remove that, because i find it as incorrect Internet-English, and thus can be improper to some extent depending on where im writing.
Hope this info / other way of thinking, helps, or "widen your horizon" as you phrased it earlier. And btw have a great day ^^
Hello zxzzz8,
thank you for your reply.
I also didn't find anything about such a feature ... this feature as unresolved/unimplemented = 'Open', For any devs now or in the future ... thats how opensource projects works (as far as I understand), So if the current maintenance team doesn't want to bother implementing this, please just leave this issue 'Open'
I understand your efforts and generally agree to that. But there are some more things to consider when it comes to decide if a tickets will kept open or not.
In my understanding you request a feature to make the format of the log lines customizable in a human friendly way. I always like to have nice and intelligent GUIs instead of editing text files or stuff like this. This GUI aspect also fits the general idea or concept behind BIT. It is intended for desktop end users not for power users.
My "no" is not absolute. I am always open for discussion and other users and contributors convincing me. But in my current idea of BIT there shouldn't be no need for a user to even read the log file. So such a feature would be waste of resources.
In a far away future I could imagine a much more enhanced log view dialog using a list widget with columns, icons, tags, filters, etc. Something like this, more "clickedy-click":
I thought we had an open issue about it or discussed it somewhere else. But I couldn't find the issue.
In short: Closing this ticket doesn't mean I don't have the resources (but I don't), but I don't want to see such a feature in BIT at all. It would make the GUI much more complex than it should be.
EDIT: Someone might say this is open source and everyone is free to just fork and implement what they wish to. I wouldn't take it that easy. If there really is someone so damn motivated that they would invest resources and risks in forking the project just for that (IMHO not so important) feature, it would proof me wrong. In this case I would try to keep the efforts and resources in the "main" project, accepting it as a PR and assist with implementing it. 🤟 I am saying this in the hope that my "no" is not perceived as to bossy. I am not the boss, not god, or the head of something. As maintainer I define myself just as someone like a clerk, holding things together, secure efficient use of very limited resources, etc.
As for what you suggested with the Expert-Options, I did see that before, So what I need to write there is "--log-file-format=lq%t %o %h [%a] %m (%u) %f %lrq" ? Meaning %t + whats suppose to be the default
Please check the rsync man page for this. It mention somewhere the default value for FORMAT.
\Off Topic/
As I always like to say, "Language ...
I invite you to take this part of the discussion to the projects mailing list because it is off-topic.
Thank you Christian
Still not able to find that old and similar issue. But in my memory it was about to find a way to explain users lines like this
[C] cf...p..... foo/bar
Especially the letters in the beginning. The idea was to parse that and use colors/icons or something else more self explaining.
(This is so human error prone I feel, exactly one of the reasons why I want this feature req' to begin with, at least as a simple checkmark for "timestamps in logs").
If it feels to you too cluttering i understand why you would avoid that, thats why I also tried to suggest it also as just a simple checkmark to "Enable timestamps for logs" and nothing more, At least this suggestion shouldn't be too cluttery right? i would really love to see that, and sense its more specific i suspect it is easier to maintain as well?
It could be right under the 'Enabling logs' option, in gray-blocked until logs are enabled as well if thats how you prefer, that way it also feel "irrelevant" for those who didn't enable logs, in a sense less cluttery even more.
And btw i hope you have a great day ^^
Just a question for me to be sure if I understand it correct. With the term "log" do you refer to this construct?
To track the topic I created a meta issue (#2285) and connected your issue to it. Please see that issue to get an idea about the complexity of the situation. Keep also the "quality" of BIT's code base in mind and how this make easy things damn difficult. I'll keep it open but also reduced the priority via assign it to the far-away-milestone.