> I also don't recall if I mentioned this, but this is also on ARM. I assume everything else works well? I am asking because I want to make sure we do not have problems with atomic instructions replacements.
Rainer > > On 5/31/2011 11:48 PM, Rory Toma wrote: > > That did not work, either. Is this behaviour compiled in by default, > > or is there a compile/config time flag that I need to set? > > > > On 5/31/2011 11:24 PM, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > >> Sorry, I was so focused on the bug (which existed anyway) that I did > >> not notice the config problem. You need to use this directive in a > >> rule chain. So this should work: > >> > >> *.* @@<machine>:110 > >> $ActionExecOnlyWhenPreviousIsSuspended on & @@<machine>:143 > >> $ActionExecOnlyWhenPreviousIsSuspended off > >> > >> Note that the second filter has been replaced by an "&" which means > >> that the actions are chained (and using the same filter). > >> > >> Please let me know if that solves the issue (note that on older v5 > >> builds this does NOT work due to the bug). > >> > >> Rainer > > _______________________________________________ > rsyslog mailing list > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > http://www.rsyslog.com _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
