From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDF7F1FF16F
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 09:51:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C43EB1ADCB;
	Thu, 16 Jan 2025 09:51:12 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 09:51:04 +0100
From: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?q?Gr=FCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
References: <20250115095901.809989-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
 <4bf6dd93-1274-4c25-8bf8-5b1ba37d2f18@proxmox.com>
 <27ec7af2-cfa8-4202-9137-eb9182b80e52@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <27ec7af2-cfa8-4202-9137-eb9182b80e52@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: astroid/0.16.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid)
Message-Id: <1737017396.ggw2z4w5gj.astroid@yuna.none>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.046 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC PATCH storage] pvesm export: convert dd's \r
 in status=progress output to \n
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>

On January 16, 2025 9:13 am, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> On 1/15/25 12:28, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
>> Am 15.01.25 um 10:59 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
>>> pvesm export is mostly used for (remote) migrations, where the
>>> status progress output lands in a task log. For task logs we want to
>>> have line based output (since it's not a terminal), but dd uses \r
>>> to overwrite the same line which does not work in every situation, e.g.
>>> browsers sometimes simply don't show them, making the dd output a long
>>> line instead of separate ones.
>>>
>>> To fix this, use run_command's `errfunc` to log the lines. run_command
>>> will split also on \r, but with warn we print a \n so this does the
>>> conversion.
>>>
>>> This fixes an issue where the remote migration task log on PDM does not
>>> display that part in new lines. (ExtJS works because it does things
>>> differently and some browser quirks convert \r to \n)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
>>> ---
>>> Not sure if we want to take this approach because we lose the
>>> functionalty of overwriting progress on the terminal.
>> 
>> FWIW, you could test with `-t STDERR` if the std error FD is a terminal
>> and differ between replacing \r or not.
>> 
> 
> not sure if that would work here since we do quite some redirection for
> the worker task (to be able to display + putting it in the task log at
> the same time), but yes, I'll try that
> 
>>>
>>> AFAICS there is no easy way to only do this for the task log, since
>>> we simply pipe the output fh of the worker task to the task log fh.
>>>
>>> Alternatively we could patch the task log api to parse \r as newlines or
>>> patch the yew widget toolkit to replace \r with \n.
>> 
>> Wouldn't be one alternative also be to do that in the UI?
> 
> thats what i meant in that sentence. (replacing in yew widget toolkit)

one issue with that though would be that the line (in the task log/API
response) can get really long? not sure whether/where that might cause
problems..


_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel