From were can i get... accustamp
Thankyou..
Seby...
Seby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From were can i get... accustamp
accustamp is a part of older version of Dan Bernstein's daemontools package.
The functionality of accustamp has been put into multilog, which replaces
cyclog.
If you need accustamp, you'll
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Seby wrote:
> From were can i get... accustamp
>
> Thankyou..
Charles has already said you can get it from daemontools-0.53 (or
less). However, I've got one in perl if you'd like. It works under
Solaris and Linux.
You'll need to h
I decided to run a supervised copy of qmail. As I found in the list archiv,
I was not the first one who has trouble with the pipe in the /var/qmail/rc
file:
exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
qmail-start ./Mailbox accustamp | setuser qmaill cyclog /var/log/qmail
But I also
Hello people!
We've been running qmail more then 6 months and have a lot of logs.
Now I want them analyze with qmailanalog, but matchup doesn't like
timestamps in logs because we do accustamp on logs and the tailocal it.
So, what we have is:
1999-11-24 17:43:07.542160 status:
Hi,
I'm being a newbie I'm slightly concerned that accustamp has turned into a
zombie.
Here is what ps -aux says:
qmaill 105 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? Z16:36 0:00 (accustamp )
qmailq 108 0.0 0.1 832 224 ? S16:36 0:00 qmail-clean
qmailr 107 0.0 0.1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>So, what we have is:
>
>1999-11-24 17:43:07.542160 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
>
>but matchup needs:
>
>957284032.988038 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
>
>Is it correct?
Yes.
>So, the question is how would one use qmailanalog in that situation?
Convert the local ti
]
Subject: Re: accustamp|tailocal|matchup
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>So, what we have is:
>
>1999-11-24 17:43:07.542160 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
>
>but matchup needs:
>
>957284032.988038 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
>
>Is it correct?
Yes.
>So, the question is ho
On Tue, 2 May 2000, Kins Orekhov wrote:
>
> Hello people!
>
> We've been running qmail more then 6 months and have a lot of logs.
> Now I want them analyze with qmailanalog, but matchup doesn't like
> timestamps in logs because we do accustamp on logs and the tailoc
"Peter Samuel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 2 May 2000, Kins Orekhov wrote:
> > ...
> > So, what we have is:
> >
> > 1999-11-24 17:43:07.542160 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
> >
> > but matchup needs:
> >
> > 957284032.988038 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
> > ...
> I have a patch fo
> > 1999-11-24 17:43:07.542160 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
> >
> > but matchup needs:
> >
> > 957284032.988038 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
> Russ Allebury has a similar patch.
Yes, I have tried that and it didn't work for me.
Comments for tai64nfrac says:
Expects the input stream
Kins Orekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, I have tried that and it didn't work for me.
> Comments for tai64nfrac says:
>
> Expects the input stream to be a sequence of lines beginning with @ (1), a
> timestamp in external TAI64N format, and a space. Replaces the @ and the
> timesta
alog.
Now, I'm really confused.
Here's the path that logs go thru on my machine:
qmail -> accustamp -> tailocal
If I'm disabling tailocal, then my logs ARE suitable for qmailanalog,
so why do I need to run my logs thru tai64nfrac if everything
works fine in this case?
And anothe
> I've wrote a small awk-script to accomplish this, but it doesn't work with
> big files on my machine (more then 440-445 lines), and I can't figure out
> why (if someone has suggestions/recommendations, please, let me know):
>
> This script does the trick for me. Again, originally I was for such
x) and it will generate timestamps suitable for qmailanalog.
>
> Now, I'm really confused.
>
> Here's the path that logs go thru on my machine:
>
> qmail -> accustamp -> tailocal
accustamp ALREADY gives you timestamps suitable for qmailanalog, as
you state below
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Now, I'm really confused.
>
>Here's the path that logs go thru on my machine:
>
>qmail -> accustamp -> tailocal
>
>If I'm disabling tailocal, then my logs ARE suitable for qmailanalog,
>so why do I need to run my logs thru
>
> Why not just store the logs in there accustamp or multilog form and
> convert them to localtime ONLY when you need to look at them.
Because we look at them too often :)
--
Kins Orekhov
Outlook Technologies, Inc.
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 773-775-2099, ext.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Why not just store the logs in there accustamp or multilog form and
>> convert them to localtime ONLY when you need to look at them.
>
>Because we look at them too often :)
So what? Do you have a quota on the number of times tailocal can be
run?
-Dave
Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Thu, 04 May 2000:
> So what? Do you have a quota on the number of times tailocal can be
> run?
I'm not the person asking the question, but I'm guessing that the
annoyance factor of having to do
tailocal < logfile | less
instead of
less logfile
is qui
Mikko Hänninen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I wonder if there is some automagical solution that
>could be used with lessopen.sh, or something else? It's of course
>possible to create an alias or whatever, but that also has an annoyance
>factor greater than the simplest form, since you'd need to u
On Thu, 4 May 2000, Kins Orekhov wrote:
> >
> > Why not just store the logs in there accustamp or multilog form and
> > convert them to localtime ONLY when you need to look at them.
>
> Because we look at them too often :)
And can't you look at them by passing
Peter Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 5 May 2000 at 11:56:47 +1000
> On Thu, 4 May 2000, Kins Orekhov wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Why not just store the logs in there accustamp or multilog form and
> > > convert them to localtime ONLY when you need to l
On Thu, 4 May 2000, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> Peter Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 5 May 2000 at 11:56:47 +1000
> > On Thu, 4 May 2000, Kins Orekhov wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > Why not just store the logs in there accustamp or multilog for
gt;
> > > > >
> > > > > Why not just store the logs in there accustamp or multilog form and
> > > > > convert them to localtime ONLY when you need to look at them.
> > > >
> > > > Because we look at them too often :)
gt; > On Thu, 4 May 2000, Kins Orekhov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why not just store the logs in there accustamp or multilog
form and
> > > > > > convert them to localtime ONLY when you need to look at them.
> > > > >
> &
"David Dyer-Bennet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > And you editor can't read in the results of a program?
>
> I can think offhand of a couple of ways of doing it, but all of them
> are grossly inefficient and take lots of keystrokes. There may wel
Kins Orekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > And can't you look at them by passing them through tai64nlocal each
> > time? Can you spell "shell script wrapper"? :)
>
> I *asked* the list about *some program* which can do reverse time
> translation for my *already existin
> > Because we look at them too often :)
>
> And can't you look at them by passing them through tai64nlocal each
> time? Can you spell "shell script wrapper"? :)
I *asked* the list about *some program* which can do reverse time
translation for my *already existing logs* - from Local to TAI.
I *k
On Sun, Jan 31, 1999 at 10:27:43AM +, Peter Gradwell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm being a newbie I'm slightly concerned that accustamp has turned into a
> zombie.
>
> Here is what ps -aux says:
>
> qmaill 105 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? Z16:36 0:00 (accu
At 4:08 pm +0100 31/1/99,the wonderful Peter van Dijk wrote:
>> exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
>> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-start ./Mailbox /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
>> | setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/cyclog -s 500 -n 30 /var/log/qmail &
>
>Is s
(Russ, could you add the link to www.qmail.org?)
I have a daemontools patch available that allows daemontools-0.70's
multilog to reintroduce accustamp-style time stamps if desired. The patch
introduces a "T" multilog action for that. Like the "t" action, it has
to be
Matthias Andree writes:
> (Russ, could you add the link to www.qmail.org?)
Na. There's already a tai64nunix as well as tai64nfrac. While I
think Dan's just a *tad* early, I don't think we should be introducing
Y2.038K bugs into code that's already been fixed. I mean, I'm 42 now.
I'll only
Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Na. There's already a tai64nunix as well as tai64nfrac. While I
> think Dan's just a *tad* early, I don't think we should be introducing
> Y2.038K bugs into code that's already been fixed. I mean, I'm 42 now.
> I'll only be 80 then. I expect I'
33 matches
Mail list logo
