On 10/07/2008 Michael Biebl wrote: > Jonas Meurer wrote: >> Just wanted to bring up that topic again. I believe it's far to late for >> changing the default syslog daemon for lenny to rsyslog, albeit I think >> it would be really desirable. >> >> According to http://wiki.debian.org/Rsyslog all preliminary tasks are >> already done, so as far as I can see the only thing that still needs to >> be done is changing priorities of sysklogd/klogd and rsyslog. >> > > Hi Jonas, > hi release team, > > first of all, I have to say, that I think the rsyslog package is in > pretty good shape and I still think a switch to rsyslog as default > syslog is doable in time for lenny. > As you can read from my former emails [1], I would have preferred, if > such a switch would have been done much earlier. > From all the feedback and requests I get (from users and other DDs), > there seems to be a strong interest in rsyslog being the default syslog. > > So I'd like to ask the release team again on their opinion on this > matter and if they would acknowledge this change. > > If so, I'd forward the request to change the priorities to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (unless someone from the ftpmaster team reads this > message and directly answers to it). > > If we want to have rsyslog as default syslog, the switch should be done > rsn imho. I wouldn't feel comfortable, if it was done just before > release (as Luk said, would be possible [2]), especially as I don't > know, if other changes are also required (e.g. to d-i, tasksel etc). > > [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2008/04/msg00069.html > [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2008/04/msg00065.html
Forwarding the mail to debian-devel. Are there any objections by developers against rsyslog as default syslog daemon? Or do lenny release managers have any objections against doing that in time for lenny? greetings, jonas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature