Fixing the many DEBUG statements that have confusing info ...

[Jeremy Allison]

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 08:05:39AM -0700, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:27 AM, Volker Lendecke
> <Volker.Lendecke at sernet.de> wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 09:09:03PM -0700, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> >> Hi folks,
> >>
> >> I thought I would spend some time fixing DEBUG statements using this idiom:
> >>
> >> @@ -705,8 +705,8 @@ static bool smbd_open_one_socket(struct smbd_parent_context
> >> *parent,
> >>         ifss,
> >>         true);
> >>   if (s->fd == -1) {
> >> - DEBUG(0,("smbd_open_one_socket: open_socket_in: "
> >> - "%s\n", strerror(errno)));
> >> + DEBUG(0,("%s: open_socket_in: %s\n",
> >> + __func__, strerror(errno)));
> >>   TALLOC_FREE(s);
> >>   /*
> >>   * We ignore an error here, as we've done before
> >>
> >> where we use %s and __func__.
> >>
> >> However, then I looked at a log file, and saw the following:
> >>
> >> [2015/09/27 03:37:05.961482, 10, pid=13547, effective(0, 0), real(0,
> >> 0)] ../source3/lib/messages_dgm.c:403(messaging_dgm_wipe)
> >>   messaging_dgm_cleanup(12521) returned Resource temporarily unavailable
> >>
> >> That is, we already print the source file name, line number and the
> >> function name. (And the debug message the produced that has gotten out
> >> of sync with the actual location.)
> >>
> >> Why should we duplicate that info. Surely it is better to simply
> >> eliminate the function names from DEBUG messages.
> >
> > Try smbd -d10 -i or any commandline tool.
> 
> Well, then we should fix the DEBUG macros so that they add __func__ in
> all cases.

+1 on that.