[PATCH] lshal - The next generation

[David Zeuthen]

On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 13:38 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > No, it needs to be stderr because we print normal information using
> > stdout and programs launching lshal might grep for this. Now, if things
> > fail we don't want to confuse the program launching lshal in case it
> > doesn't check if the return code is non-zero. Printing errors to stderr,
> > not stdout, is pretty standard practice I think :-)
> 
> But we print lots stuff to stderr, like the usage text, and all the
> monitor output text -- shouldn't this be stdout?

Only usage text and text from errors should go to stderr - the rest
(e.g. the actual program output from a successful run) should go to
stdout.

Cheers,
David