Hi all, I hope this is the right list. I wonder what systemd does if the syslogd does not start when told to do so.
Reason behind this question: in rsyslog, I try hard to record messages even if rsyslog.conf is screwed up. For that reason, I accept partially complete configs. And if things go really bad and I can not get anything that "looks" working, I startup a special, hardcoded, minimal config. All of this just in an effort to prevent log message loss. Now with systemd around, I hope I can do the cleaner thing and just err out and terminate rsyslogd. That would probably alert users much better. It would also clean up the code and be less surprising to users (it either works fully correct or not at all - what you usually expect). I assume that in this situation systemd takes the log socket over again. Am I right with that? What would be the best way to log a message to systemd in such a situation? Via the usual syslog() mechanism (with rsyslog being a client in this case)? Thanks, Rainer _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
