Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merge gcla/tail changes back to maintainer #74

Closed
pocc opened this issue Dec 11, 2019 · 9 comments
Closed

Merge gcla/tail changes back to maintainer #74

pocc opened this issue Dec 11, 2019 · 9 comments
Labels
feature request New feature or request

Comments

@pocc
Copy link
Collaborator

pocc commented Dec 11, 2019

bug report/feature request/ask

gcla/tail can't take issues and I have a couple of thoughts:

  • It currently references hpcloud/tail, which isn't being maintained (according to this issue since 2016)
  • I want to use it for a project 👍; current references to hpcloud/tail in gcla/tail break when I use it (like Tail type mismatch #72).
  • nxadm/tail is a successor project and could benefit from your bytes contributions
@gcla
Copy link
Owner

gcla commented Dec 18, 2019

Hi - interesting, and thanks for the nxadm/tail lead. Maybe I should open an issue and ask if they'd be interested in tailing by bytes rather than by line. The code I hacked in and renamed gcla/tail was pretty cheesy and I'd feel sheepish offering it up as-is though.

@dawidd6
Copy link
Contributor

dawidd6 commented Dec 18, 2019

I'm currently trying to upgrade termshark in Debian and I would need to package your fork of tail fork. It would be better to package just the fork, I guess, so I'm gonna wait a bit if you decide to contribute your changes to upstream.

@pocc pocc added the feature request New feature or request label Dec 18, 2019
@pocc
Copy link
Collaborator Author

pocc commented Dec 18, 2019

I can take care of the merge and cleanup of code at some point. This will likely mean instead of using replacements of bytes for strings, parallel methods are used.

@gcla
Copy link
Owner

gcla commented Dec 23, 2019

Hi @dawidd6 - quick question for you. The tail fork package is only needed on termshark for Windows because on Linux and friends we can just rely on the familiar tail command being installed. If the uses of gcla/tail were only within Go files that were compiled only on Windows (e.g. +build windows), would that remove the need for packaging gcla/tail for termshark on Debian? I'm not familiar with the Debian packaging procedures. Also - thank you for packaging it up, I wouldn't know where to start - much appreciated...

@dawidd6
Copy link
Contributor

dawidd6 commented Dec 23, 2019

@gcla yea, using build tags should eliminate the need to package this dependency, since it would be windows only. Good solution!

@gcla
Copy link
Owner

gcla commented Dec 23, 2019

@pocc - I opened this issue against nxadm/tail, to see if they're interested in byte-level tailing: nxadm/tail#13

@pocc
Copy link
Collaborator Author

pocc commented Dec 23, 2019

Cheers

@nxadm
Copy link

nxadm commented Jan 25, 2021

Just a small note that I haven't forgotten the issue, but that I am busy merging and reviewing the many issues and PRs open on the dormant upstream project. Because nxadm/tail is starting to get some traction (as fas as I can see from git clones and the addition to Fedora/Debian/Ubuntu), I am extra careful not to break stuff :).

@gcla
Copy link
Owner

gcla commented Jul 15, 2022

Just cleaning up - please re-open if this would still be useful to have.

@gcla gcla closed this as completed Jul 15, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature request New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants