On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Alun wrote:
> You might be able to do something cute with a named pipe, but basically
> that's just reinventing syslog, so no real gain.
There is no need for a named pipe. Just read the file. You have to be a
bit cunning when it is re-cycled, but it's all been invented befor
Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Can the "log file" be some sort of pipe into a program? I might just
> pipe the stream into something like netcat and process it on another
> server or do some other tricks with it. If this would work how would
> you specify
On 30 Sep 2005 at 12:23, Marc Perkel wrote about
"Re: [exim] Multiple Log Files - Fea":
| Can the "log file" be some sort of pipe into a program? I might just
| pipe the stream into something like netcat and process it on another
| server or do some other tricks with it
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Marc Perkel wrote:
> >
> >`man syslog.conf`
> >
> >
> >
> >
> That doesn't answer the question. I asked "how would you specify piping
> the stream into a program".
>
Did you read the man page? Your *nix system has all it needs,
assuming your program can read from a pipe. If
Dave Lugo wrote:
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Marc Perkel wrote:
Can the "log file" be some sort of pipe into a program? I might just
pipe the stream into something like netcat and process it on another
server or do some other tricks with it. If this would work how would you
specify it?
`
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
> Can the "log file" be some sort of pipe into a program? I might just
> pipe the stream into something like netcat and process it on another
> server or do some other tricks with it. If this would work how would you
> specify it?
>
`man syslog.conf`
--
Can the "log file" be some sort of pipe into a program? I might just
pipe the stream into something like netcat and process it on another
server or do some other tricks with it. If this would work how would you
specify it?
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
Ian Eiloart wrote:
--On 29 September 2005 10:08:09 -0700 Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Peter, I think you should look on the wiki to see how much work Marc
has done there - restructuring and posting tips that he got from this
list. Then you might feel less hostile toward him.
Marc Sherman wrote:
Alun wrote:
I usually just jump into the Marc bashing, then back out of actually
sending a mail because I realise other people have already done it
:-)
Marc Haber and I haven't been agreeing on much these past couple
weeks, but I think we can both agree that we'd app
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Alun wrote:
> As I say, I only took a quick glance... It looked like open_log is
> (at present) only called once per instance of exim, as it then caches
> the file descriptor.
Roughly speaking, yes.
> If log_write just checked for a flag indicating that log_file_path
> nee
Philip Hazel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, Alun wrote:
>
> > But... quickly looking at the source code, I can't see why this
> > isn't easily done. Admittedly I've not gone into it in detail, but
> > couldn't the "open_log" function do the string
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, Alun wrote:
> But... quickly looking at the source code, I can't see why this isn't easily
> done. Admittedly I've not gone into it in detail, but couldn't the "open_log"
> function do the string expansions on log_file_path every time it's called and
> the "log_write" funct
On 29/09/05, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Peter, I think you should look on the wiki to see how much work Marc
> > has done there - restructuring and posting tips that he got from this
> > list. Then you might feel less hostile toward him.
> >
> Thanks - there are too many people
Alun wrote:
I usually just jump into the Marc bashing, then back out of actually
sending a mail because I realise other people have already done it
:-)
Marc Haber and I haven't been agreeing on much these past couple weeks,
but I think we can both agree that we'd appreciate you not jumping in
Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> How would you do that with a separate program?
>
> Basically I have different classes of customers and they use different
>
> IP addresses in the same computer for my spam filtering service. So if
> I could create separate lo
Ian Eiloart wrote:
--On 28 September 2005 16:54:45 +0100 Peter Bowyer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 28/09/05, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How would you do that with a separate program?
You were told this in the othe other thread you've got running on the
same subject.
--On 28 September 2005 16:54:45 +0100 Peter Bowyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 28/09/05, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How would you do that with a separate program?
You were told this in the othe other thread you've got running on the
same subject.
That's just not true. He o
Hello Marc,
Marc Perkel, 28.09.2005 (d.m.y):
> How would you do that with a separate program?
Do you know "grep"?
Regards,
Christian Schmidt
--
Der Optimist hat nicht weniger oft unrecht als der Pessimist, aber er
lebt froher.
-- Charlie Rivel
--
## List details at http://ww
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 08:45 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> How would you do that with a separate program?
>
> Basically I have different classes of customers and they use different
> IP addresses in the same computer for my spam filtering service. So if I
> could create separate log files I could m
On 28/09/05, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How would you do that with a separate program?
You were told this in the othe other thread you've got running on the
same subject.
(Hint: 1 thread is generally enough - especially when you don't read them)
Peer
--
Peter Bowyer
Email: [EMAIL
How would you do that with a separate program?
Basically I have different classes of customers and they use different
IP addresses in the same computer for my spam filtering service. So if I
could create separate log files I could monitor them with tail more
easilly. It's so busy that the scre
On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 08:52 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> Is there any way to have multiple log files? I'd like to have a separate
> like file for each interface address.
Might be possible with a single daemon if pushing out to syslog and
using syslog-ng
--
Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
## List
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Marc Perkel wrote:
> I'd like to have multiple log files without having to run multiple instances
> of Exim.
Which log file would be chosen for messages that do not relate to an
interface? Or would you have yet another log file for those? Anyway, it
can't be done with Exim,
I'd like to have multiple log files without having to run multiple
instances of Exim.
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Marc Perkel wrote:
> From: Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: exim-users@exim.org
> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:52:06 -0700
> Subject: [exim] Multiple Log Files
>
> Is there any way to have multiple log files? I'd like to have a
> separ
--On 27 September 2005 08:52:06 -0700 Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there any way to have multiple log files? I'd like to have a separate
like file for each interface address.
--
Marc Perkel - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Spam Filter: http://www.junkemailfilter.com
My Blog: http://marc.
On 27 Sep 2005 at 8:52, Marc Perkel wrote about
"[exim] Multiple Log Files":
| Is there any way to have multiple log files? I'd like to have a separate
| like file for each interface address.
RTFM log_file_path.
You'd need to run separate exim daemons listening to eac
Is there any way to have multiple log files? I'd like to have a separate
like file for each interface address.
--
Marc Perkel - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Spam Filter: http://www.junkemailfilter.com
My Blog: http://marc.perkel.com
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-user
28 matches
Mail list logo
