Re: [PATCH] Logging to syslog
Hi,
I checked other daemons and it seems they allow changing of facility as well.
Therefore I change
my opinion on this.
+1 for this patch.
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
Am 30.11.2010 um 15:52 schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
> Does it hurt to be able to change it? Really?
>
> I'm all for correctness, but extra flexibility is usually welcomed imho.
> --
> Alejandro Guerrieri
> aguerri...@kannel.org
>
>
>
> On 30/11/2010, at 15:26, Alexander Malysh wrote:
>
>> I mean, we should not allow to change syslog-facility because it's standard
>> to use daemon.
>> and most modern syslog daemons allow you match program name and some of then
>> even regex match.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alexander Malysh
>>
>> Am 30.11.2010 um 14:58 schrieb Stipe Tolj:
>>
>>> Am 30.11.2010 14:45, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
That's extremely unflexible imho. If you want to get kannel to log alone
without being cluttered with other daemon's logs, you're out of luck.
In our case, we'd like to use it for remote logging, so we'd use one of
the "user" facilities to get kannel and _only_ kannel on it, directed to
kannel-only log files.
I don't see the problem on allowing the extra flexibility. It's definitely
useful for our scenario at least.
>>>
>>> yep, agree... we keep the default as Alexander suggest as 'LOG_DAEMON'
>>> facility,
>>> but provide the capabilities to extend what we want. Right?
>>>
>>> Stipe
>>>
>>> --
>>> ---
>>> Kölner Landstrasse 419
>>> 40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
>>>
>>> tolj.org system architecture Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
>>> http://www.tolj.org/ http://www.kannel.org/
>>>
>>> mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
>>> ---
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [PATCH] Logging to syslog
Ok. I'll write the userguide documentation and commit afterwards.
Regards,
--
Alejandro Guerrieri
aguerri...@kannel.org
On 02/12/2010, at 18:15, Alexander Malysh wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I checked other daemons and it seems they allow changing of facility as well.
> Therefore I change
> my opinion on this.
>
> +1 for this patch.
>
> Thanks,
> Alexander Malysh
>
> Am 30.11.2010 um 15:52 schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
>
>> Does it hurt to be able to change it? Really?
>>
>> I'm all for correctness, but extra flexibility is usually welcomed imho.
>> --
>> Alejandro Guerrieri
>> aguerri...@kannel.org
>>
>>
>>
>> On 30/11/2010, at 15:26, Alexander Malysh wrote:
>>
>>> I mean, we should not allow to change syslog-facility because it's standard
>>> to use daemon.
>>> and most modern syslog daemons allow you match program name and some of
>>> then even regex match.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Alexander Malysh
>>>
>>> Am 30.11.2010 um 14:58 schrieb Stipe Tolj:
>>>
Am 30.11.2010 14:45, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
> That's extremely unflexible imho. If you want to get kannel to log alone
> without being cluttered with other daemon's logs, you're out of luck.
>
> In our case, we'd like to use it for remote logging, so we'd use one of
> the "user" facilities to get kannel and _only_ kannel on it, directed to
> kannel-only log files.
>
> I don't see the problem on allowing the extra flexibility. It's
> definitely useful for our scenario at least.
yep, agree... we keep the default as Alexander suggest as 'LOG_DAEMON'
facility,
but provide the capabilities to extend what we want. Right?
Stipe
--
---
Kölner Landstrasse 419
40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
tolj.org system architecture Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
http://www.tolj.org/ http://www.kannel.org/
mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
---
>>>
>>>
>>
>
