Hi Michael,
yes, I know about RFC 3195 being mostly abandoned. And this is indeed
chicken and egg... I don't blame you if you don't feel like working
on this. Maybe I'll pick it up given enough nagging from the network
people. Seems like it's at least possible to compile after all.
--
Cheers,
Hi Feri,
maybe you are interested in rsyslog upstream's take on rfc 3195 support in
rsyslog:
http://kb.monitorware.com/liblogging-api-and-rfc-3195-t8508.html
This hopefully explains my reluctance.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
univer
Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>
>> The Debian changelog for version 2.0.2-2 says you removed this module
>> intentionally, but didn't it get useful since then?
>
> do you actually use and need support for RFC 3195 style of logging.
> According to rsyslog upstrea
Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> Package: rsyslog
> Version: 3.18.2-1~bpo40+1
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Hi,
>
> The Debian changelog for version 2.0.2-2 says you removed this module
> intentionally, but didn't it get useful since then?
>
Hi Feri,
do you actually use and need support for RFC 3195 style of
Package: rsyslog
Version: 3.18.2-1~bpo40+1
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
The Debian changelog for version 2.0.2-2 says you removed this module
intentionally, but didn't it get useful since then?
Thanks,
Feri.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
APT prefers stable
APT policy: (600, 'stable')
5 matches
Mail list logo
