On Monday 27 August 2001 09:12, Ben Laurie wrote:
> Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Monday 27 August 2001 07:14, Ben Laurie wrote:
> > > Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > > I would. But I have a very good reason. We already have the same
> > > > basic idea, but done a bit safer. Basically, we have a log_error
> > > > hook, but it is run at the end of log_error_core, so that we are sure
> > > > that we always get the error in the error_log, even if we don't get
> > > > it anyplace else. There are some minor tweaks that should be made to
> > > > the current hook, because right now it actually sends out too much
> > > > information, like the timestamp. But, it should handle what George
> > > > wants just fine.
> > >
> > > I don't see why this is any safer than George's proposal, though -
> > > indeed, IMO, his is more elegant since it makes it easier for someone
> > > who really wants to disable the standard error logging to be able to do
> > > so.
> >
> > Ah, but the point of my patch was to make that harder to do, not easier.
> > :-) My thinking was that error logs are everything. If you lose a log,
> > then there is a problem. If a module seg faults during the error_log,
> > then you may not ever know that there was a problem. This way, we are
> > sure the have the log on the disk regardless of what else happens. If
> > you want to disable the disk- based log, just log to /dev/null.
>
> So make the core hook run first - I still think George's was better.
So go ahead and change it to the new model. I didn't veto, I just said don't
commit it wholesale, because we already have that feature.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------
