On 09/23/2013 09:30 PM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
On 23 September 2013 23:13, Jeff Trawick <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Ivan Zhakov <[email protected]> wrote:
On 23 September 2013 22:35, Jeff Trawick <[email protected]> wrote:
In 2.4 the syslog logging wouldn't be implemented as a provider, the
ErrorLog directive parser would be different, new structure fields would be
at the end, but otherwise it shouldn't be hard :)
It could be theoretical backward compatibility issue if someone uses
log named the same as some provider. Why not add new directive
LogProvider?
I've never seen a log file within the ServerRoot directory. The risk of
such a configuration and it matching a provider actually loaded seems low
enough (and with an easy enough workaround) to forgo having a different
configuration directives between 2.4/next-major-release.
But maybe
ErrorLogProvider provider-name arg1-n
would be nicer anyway (same in all applicable branches).
Another option to use ':' to separate log provider and arguments. Like
ErrorLog syslog:arg1-n. It could be useful when log destination
specified in command line using '-E' option:
httpd -E "syslog:" or httpd -E "eventlog:Apache2" when Windows Event
log provider will be implemented.
That's what I use in my patch currently in trunk. You can even write
"ErrorLog file:logs/error_log", but for backward compatibility "ErrorLog
logs/error_log" works too.
Or do you mean you would force ':' suffix even when there are no
arguments for log provider?
Regards,
Jan Kaluza
