GNU logs - #14012, boring messages

Message sent to bug-coreutils@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#14012: [coreutils] Please add timestamps to the output of tail -f
Resent-From: Filipus Klutiero <chealer@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 22:24:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.14012.B.136381820626701 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: submit@HIDDEN, 14012 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Message-ID: <514A3660.6080102@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 18:21:20 -0400
From: Filipus Klutiero <chealer@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64;
	rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130116 Icedove/10.0.12
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org

Package: coreutils
Version: 8.13
Severity: wishlist

tail --follow is useful to see what is being added to a file. However, 
if the monitored file is followed for a certain period, it doesn't 
indicate when the new content was added. It would be nice if tail 
allowed to prepend timestamps to the output, as MultiTail's -ts option does.

This is a little delicate to do. The timestamp could be prepended to 
each line, or only to each atomic addition to the file. Also, as we 
don't know when the existing lines were added, we can't give them an 
exact timestamp. MultiTail stamps them with the time of MultiTail's 
launch, but I find that a bit misleading. I would consider simply not 
stamping these.
In any case, as this alters the output, this should be optional.

Scanning the changelog suggests this has not been implemented as of 8.21.

Message sent:

Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.428 (Entity 5.428)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
From: help-debbugs@HIDDEN (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Filipus Klutiero <chealer@HIDDEN>
Subject: bug#14012: Acknowledgement ([coreutils] Please add timestamps to
 the output of tail -f)
Message-ID: <handler.14012.B.136381820626701.ack <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
References: <514A3660.6080102@HIDDEN>
X-Gnu-PR-Message: ack 14012
X-Gnu-PR-Package: coreutils
Reply-To: 14012 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 22:24:03 +0000

Thank you for filing a new bug report with debbugs.gnu.org.

This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
has been received.

Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other
interested parties for their attention; they will reply in due course.

Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s):
 bug-coreutils@HIDDEN

If you wish to submit further information on this problem, please
send it to 14012 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

Please do not send mail to help-debbugs@HIDDEN unless you wish
to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system.

--=20
14012: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D14012
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@HIDDEN with problems

Message sent to bug-coreutils@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#14012: Bug#703565: [coreutils] Please add timestamps to the output of tail -f
Resent-From: Bob Proulx <bob@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 22:53:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.14012.B14012.136381996829553 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: Filipus Klutiero <chealer@HIDDEN>
Cc: 703565@HIDDEN, 14012 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:50:49 -0600
From: Bob Proulx <bob@HIDDEN>
Message-ID: <20130320225049.GE7495@HIDDEN>
Mail-Followup-To: Filipus Klutiero <chealer@HIDDEN>,
	703565@HIDDEN, 14012 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
References: <514A3660.6080102@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="UFHRwCdBEJvubb2X"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <514A3660.6080102@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: list
Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org


--UFHRwCdBEJvubb2X
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> tail --follow is useful to see what is being added to a file.
> However, if the monitored file is followed for a certain period, it
> doesn't indicate when the new content was added. It would be nice if
> tail allowed to prepend timestamps to the output, as MultiTail's -ts
> option does.

But, but, but... multitail already does this.

> This is a little delicate to do. The timestamp could be prepended to
> each line, or only to each atomic addition to the file. Also, as we
> don't know when the existing lines were added, we can't give them an
> exact timestamp. MultiTail stamps them with the time of MultiTail's
> launch, but I find that a bit misleading. I would consider simply
> not stamping these.

As you note there is no clean solution for those previously added
lines.  No matter what is done it cannot be correct.

> In any case, as this alters the output, this should be optional.
>=20
> Scanning the changelog suggests this has not been implemented as of 8.21.

This is most easily done using normal tools already.  As you know the
philosophy is that programs should do one thing and then those should
work together to build more complex things.  For example here is one
way to do what you are asking.  And this is just one of many
possibilities.

  $ tail -f /var/log/syslog | perl -MPOSIX -lne 'print strftime("%T ",local=
time()), $_;'

Also there already exists multitail which does what you are asking.
If so then why not simply use multitail?  Is the natural progression
that tail be mutated into multitail?  In that case we should simply
use multitail directly.  But that does have a size penalty.

  $ ll -h /usr/bin/tail /usr/bin/multitail
  -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 264K Jan 23  2012 /usr/bin/multitail
  -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  67K Nov 18 08:25 /usr/bin/tail

Bob

--UFHRwCdBEJvubb2X
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlFKPUkACgkQ0pRcO8E2ULZD3gCfbip/zlxjyjAKRiKYj1etBX93
HVsAnA6T7NTUDQtHn4pqVpT3jA9KpQAk
=c48T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--UFHRwCdBEJvubb2X--

Message sent to bug-coreutils@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#14012: Bug#703565: [coreutils] Please add timestamps to the output of tail -f
Resent-From: Filipus Klutiero <chealer@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 01:37:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.14012.B14012.136382976911910 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: 14012 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Message-ID: <514A6396.2060305@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:34:14 -0400
From: Filipus Klutiero <chealer@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64;
	rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130116 Icedove/10.0.12
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <514A3660.6080102@HIDDEN>
	<20130320225049.GE7495@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <20130320225049.GE7495@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org

Hi Bob,

On 2013-03-20 18:50, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>> tail --follow is useful to see what is being added to a file.
>> However, if the monitored file is followed for a certain period, it
>> doesn't indicate when the new content was added. It would be nice if
>> tail allowed to prepend timestamps to the output, as MultiTail's -ts
>> option does.
> But, but, but... multitail already does this.
>
>> This is a little delicate to do. The timestamp could be prepended to
>> each line, or only to each atomic addition to the file. Also, as we
>> don't know when the existing lines were added, we can't give them an
>> exact timestamp. MultiTail stamps them with the time of MultiTail's
>> launch, but I find that a bit misleading. I would consider simply
>> not stamping these.
> As you note there is no clean solution for those previously added
> lines.  No matter what is done it cannot be correct.

I didn't mean to say there is no *clean* way to do this. For me, as long 
as the program behaves according to its documentation, it's clean. The 
documentation should simply explain the drawbacks.
If it's too difficult to choose one true behavior, options can be 
introduced to control the output for existing content and for new 
content. However, at this stage I suggest we simply figure out the best 
defaults, implement that... then see if we have more insatisfaction.
But, no, there is no *easy* solution. Given that any behavior is 
inconvenient, I certainly recommend to make this optional (i.e. 
non-default).
>
>> In any case, as this alters the output, this should be optional.
>>
>> Scanning the changelog suggests this has not been implemented as of 8.21.
> This is most easily done using normal tools already.  As you know the
> philosophy is that programs should do one thing and then those should
> work together to build more complex things.  For example here is one
> way to do what you are asking.  And this is just one of many
> possibilities.
>
>    $ tail -f /var/log/syslog | perl -MPOSIX -lne 'print strftime("%T ",localtime()), $_;'
>
> Also there already exists multitail which does what you are asking.
> If so then why not simply use multitail?  Is the natural progression
> that tail be mutated into multitail?  In that case we should simply
> use multitail directly.  But that does have a size penalty.
>
>    $ ll -h /usr/bin/tail /usr/bin/multitail
>    -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 264K Jan 23  2012 /usr/bin/multitail
>    -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  67K Nov 18 08:25 /usr/bin/tail
>
> Bob

I cannot answer these questions, as I do not know MultiTail. I'm not 
really saying MultiTail is a problem for me at this time. If you had 
asked me a couple of days ago though, I'd have had to answer I didn't 
know MultiTail. To find out about it, I had to read tail's Wikipedia 
page (and then, I tried 3 or 4 tail alternatives to find one with 
timestamped monitoring).
I suggested this because I have to use MultiTail when I could use tail 
to do my job exactly as well if only it had had this option. And, I 
suppose it's not only me needing this. For example, see this thread: 
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/21564/is-there-a-unix-utility-to-prepend-timestamps-to-lines-of-text
I understand this is a request to add a feature - the addition will 
surely complexify tail and make it heavier, as you say. Although I 
wouldn't think the binary would weight much more, I can see that any 
growth of coreutils is a concern when considering embedded devices. If 
your stance is that this feature would be worth it theoretically, but is 
not worth its weight at this point, I'd suggest to have the 
documentation point to MultiTail. On my side, I might suggest including 
MultiTail in standard Debian. If we think this feature is just 
uninteresting because it's too easy to code, then I'd suggest including 
an example full command to timestamp output in the documentation, for 
those of us who didn't touch perl since school days.

Thanks for the suggestions of alternatives. FWIW, the thread above had a 
simpler suggestion, $ tail -f foo| ts; However, ts is in moreutils, 
which isn't installed by default (in Debian), so it is no better than 
MultiTail in so far as an extra package must generally be installed.

Message sent to bug-coreutils@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#14012: Bug#703565: [coreutils] Please add timestamps to the output of tail -f
Resent-From: Bob Proulx <bob@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:40:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.14012.B14012.13648379688824 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 14012
X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Filipus Klutiero <chealer@HIDDEN>
Cc: 14012 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 14012-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B14012.13648379688824
          (code B ref 14012); Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:40:01 +0000
Received: (at 14012) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Apr 2013 17:39:28 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56277 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1UMiha-0002IG-P4
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:39:28 -0400
Received: from joseki.proulx.com ([216.17.153.58]:41461)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <bob@HIDDEN>) id 1UMihX-0002I8-Mq
	for 14012 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:39:25 -0400
Received: from hysteria.proulx.com (hysteria.proulx.com [192.168.230.119])
	by joseki.proulx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5BE2211E6;
	Mon,  1 Apr 2013 11:36:28 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by hysteria.proulx.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id C99FE2DCE2; Mon,  1 Apr 2013 11:36:28 -0600 (MDT)
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 11:36:28 -0600
From: Bob Proulx <bob@HIDDEN>
Message-ID: <20130401173628.GA9327@HIDDEN>
References: <514A3660.6080102@HIDDEN>
	<20130320225049.GE7495@HIDDEN>
	<514A6396.2060305@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <514A6396.2060305@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
	<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
	<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Score: -4.2 (----)

Additionally I ran into "annotate-output" today.

  NAME
       annotate-output - annotate program output with time and stream

  DESCRIPTION
       annotate-output  will  execute  the specified program, while prepending
       every line with the current time and O for stdout and E for
       stderr.

  EXAMPLE
       $ annotate-output make
       21:41:21 I: Started make
       21:41:21 O: gcc -Wall program.c
       21:43:18 E: program.c: Couldn't compile, and took me ages to find out
       21:43:19 E: collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
       21:43:19 E: make: *** [all] Error 1
       21:43:19 I: Finished with exitcode 2

Since you mentioned Debian I will note that it is packaged for Debian
in the devscripts packaged.  It seems to be an enhanced version of:

  http://jeroen.a-eskwadraat.nl/sw/annotate

Bob

Last modified: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 12:00:02 UTC

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.