Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On 7/23/2015 12:15 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Leon Fauster wrote: Am 23.07.2015 um 18:06 schrieb Valeri Galtsev galt...@kicp.uchicago.edu: On Thu, July 23, 2015 10:45 am, Johnny Hughes wrote: The main reason actually is chronological order. But not just for the reply .. but for IN-LINE posting. In a discussion where you need to make points in-line and where you only need some of and not all of the other posts, something that happens frequently on mailing lists, it is very much easier to read that type of collaborated message in chronological order. I mean, you don't read a book or a newspaper article or a blog post from bottom to top, right? Why would you read communications from bottom to top? And it is not really even bottom to top. If you take 4 emails of 10 lines each (and 40 lines total) .. it is 75% down to 100% (original mail)... then up to 50% and read down to 75% (2nd mail), then up to 25% and read down to 50%, then up to 0% and read down to 25%. What if someone made you read blog posts that way, or books or newspaper articles? OK, the shortest I can re-formulate your message is: on mail lists we are collectively writing the book for someone else to read (much less communicating with each other in real time ;-) Any accepted convention is better than no convention: save everybody's time. Suits me (as far as mail lists are concerned). I consider email as an asynchronous communication, therefore book style convention is recommended. Yup. We're writing electronic *mail*, not text messages (here, you've got 140 char, tell me everything you know), and you don't have a two-line pager screen I see it as a slo-mo group conversation, and top-posting is like the person who suddenly utters a nonsequitur, louder than everyone else is speaking mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Add to the above that on every phone I've ever used, new texts appear below older ones (no top posting there either). -chuck -- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Jul 24, 2015, at 2:30 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Ok, this is frustrating. May I take it, then, that no one has written the conditional filters described in the rsyslog manual? We’ve had this in our RHEL6 and now our RHEL7 rsyslog.conf: # Ignore OpenAFS errors :msg, contains, byte-range lock/unlock ignored~ :msg, contains, byte-range locks only enforced for processes on this machine ~ I’m seeing warnings in the logs that this is an old syntax on RHEL7, but it still works. -- Jonathan Billings billi...@negate.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 at 20:37 -, Always Learning wrote: There is absolutely no need to include irrelevant text when replying to a posting. Trim and Cut were sensible skills acquired by some of us in the 1980's and 1990's. Every email sent to this list includes the following in the headers: List-Archive: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/ People should trim any included text (and properly quote whatever they leave in place). If someone needs more context the list archives can supply that extra detail. Stuart -- I've never been lost; I was once bewildered for three days, but never lost! -- Daniel Boone ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Thu, July 23, 2015 10:34, Valeri Galtsev wrote: Well, my habit for regular e-mail exchange is top posting thus the person reads my message thus is right to the point why this particular message message was sent in a first place... But when mail lists are concerned, I do an opposite, that is I follow mail lists conventions. I never thought about rationale behind them, I'm just following them. I believe, if some day someone gives reasons why top posting is bad in case of mail lists it will really be great. The only reason I can come up with myself would be: whoever reads message received through mail lists usually has no idea about previous exchange in this thread, thus needs all exchange in chronological order. Which I'm not certain is a good reason, so those who know and insists strongly about no top posting are encouraged to give others the reasons behind that. Again, I'm not top posting on the lists. However, _this_ (top posting) is my regular way in private exchange (and it has good reasons behind it). It originates from early Usenet practice where it had some useful purpose given the way Usenet feeds were typically consumed and forwarded. Generally Usenet News servers maintained posts for a limited period of time. If you did not connect to obtain the news-feed within that window then all earlier posts were 'lost' to you. Thus encapsulating the entire discussion in chronological order in each reply compensated for the technological (storage) limits prevalent in the 1980/90s. The orthodox justification for bottom-posting is often exemplified by tag lines similar in content to the following: Because it makes following the discussion hard. Why is top-posting wrong? You are top-posting. What is wrong with my message? However, forcing your correspondents to wade through an interminable wall of text that regurgitates the previous thread before getting to the point of the message arguably interferes with proper understanding no less than top-posting does. I am unaware of any scientific study that purports to support either position. So, in the absence of that I conclude: De gustibus non est disputandum. At this point the practice, particularly for archived mailing lists, is little more than dogmatic adherence to a style that serves only to distinguish the 'in group' from the 'other'. -- *** e-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** Do NOT transmit sensitive data via e-Mail James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
If selinux is causing you a headache, then disable it. -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of James B. Byrne Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 8:16 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf On Thu, July 23, 2015 13:19, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Physically dragging the thread back on topic... I really am going crazy, trying to deal with the hourly logs from the loghost. We've got 170+ servers and workstations... but a *very* large percentage of what's showing up is from his bloody new fedora 22, with its idiot systemd logging of *ever* selinux message to /var/log/messages. I tried creating a rule, /etc/rsyslog.d/audit.conf, that reads: if $msg contains audit and $msg,contains,'res=success' then - but that seemed to send *everything* to /dev/null. That was my best guess, based on googling (yahooing?) and man pages. Can anyone tell me what's wrong with that syntax? mark And Lennart blames Linus[1] for why he gets hate mail. We are giving RHEL-7 a pass on this iteration. We have installed it on a couple of test hosts and are not favourably impressed with much of the user interface. At least not from the sys-admin side of things. This is not to imply that there is nothing good in 7. There are at lot of improvements that we certainly value. But it is too early in systemd development for us to waste time debugging somebody else's pipe-dream on our dime. We will see what 8 offers and decide then whether to move to something else. [1]. https://plus.google.com/app/basic/stream/z13rdjryqyn1xlt3522sxpugoz3gujbhh04 -- *** e-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** Do NOT transmit sensitive data via e-Mail James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Fri, July 24, 2015 8:16 am, James B. Byrne wrote: On Thu, July 23, 2015 13:19, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Physically dragging the thread back on topic... I really am going crazy, trying to deal with the hourly logs from the loghost. We've got 170+ servers and workstations... but a *very* large percentage of what's showing up is from his bloody new fedora 22, with its idiot systemd logging of *ever* selinux message to /var/log/messages. I tried creating a rule, /etc/rsyslog.d/audit.conf, that reads: if $msg contains audit and $msg,contains,'res=success' then - but that seemed to send *everything* to /dev/null. That was my best guess, based on googling (yahooing?) and man pages. Can anyone tell me what's wrong with that syntax? mark And Lennart blames Linus[1] for why he gets hate mail. Indeed. And thanks to Linus we have Linux kernel. And thanks to Lennart we have config files polluted with XML tags. We are giving RHEL-7 a pass on this iteration. Good for you. I started installing CentOS 7 on all new workstations (but we do pass on Linux on all new servers in favor of FreeBSD - number crunchers and maybe workstations have to be Linux though...) Valeri We have installed it on a couple of test hosts and are not favourably impressed with much of the user interface. At least not from the sys-admin side of things. This is not to imply that there is nothing good in 7. There are at lot of improvements that we certainly value. But it is too early in systemd development for us to waste time debugging somebody else's pipe-dream on our dime. We will see what 8 offers and decide then whether to move to something else. [1]. https://plus.google.com/app/basic/stream/z13rdjryqyn1xlt3522sxpugoz3gujbhh04 -- *** e-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** Do NOT transmit sensitive data via e-Mail James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 09:16:26AM -0400, James B. Byrne wrote: We are giving RHEL-7 a pass on this iteration. For what it's worth, the problem described at the beginning of this thread doesn't happen in RHEL7. Yet. Supposedly systemd is being rebased in 7.2 so we'll see. This is why Fedora exists, to work out all these kinds of problems before it hits an enterprise OS. -- Jonathan Billings billi...@negate.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 09:36:17AM -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote: Indeed. And thanks to Linus we have Linux kernel. And thanks to Lennart we have config files polluted with XML tags. There's no XML in the systemd configuration language. You might be thinking of launchd. -- Jonathan Billings billi...@negate.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Jonathan Billings wrote: On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 09:16:26AM -0400, James B. Byrne wrote: We are giving RHEL-7 a pass on this iteration. For what it's worth, the problem described at the beginning of this thread doesn't happen in RHEL7. Yet. Supposedly systemd is being rebased in 7.2 so we'll see. This is why Fedora exists, to work out all these kinds of problems before it hits an enterprise OS. Ok, this is frustrating. May I take it, then, that no one has written the conditional filters described in the rsyslog manual? I've tried several variations, such as if $msg contains 'audit' and $msg contains 'res=success' then - which resulted in *all* messages going to /dev/null, even though everything I find in googling (or I should say what little I find in googling) suggests that should work. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Sat, 25 Jul 2015, Always Learning wrote: There is absolutely no need to include irrelevant text when replying to a posting. Trim and Cut were sensible skills acquired by some of us in the 1980's and 1990's. Pertinent points pleases people perpetually. Precisely. A small amount of effort by the sender makes the discussion easier to follow for the many recipients. -- Ian ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Thu, July 23, 2015 13:19, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Physically dragging the thread back on topic... I really am going crazy, trying to deal with the hourly logs from the loghost. We've got 170+ servers and workstations... but a *very* large percentage of what's showing up is from his bloody new fedora 22, with its idiot systemd logging of *ever* selinux message to /var/log/messages. I tried creating a rule, /etc/rsyslog.d/audit.conf, that reads: if $msg contains audit and $msg,contains,'res=success' then - but that seemed to send *everything* to /dev/null. That was my best guess, based on googling (yahooing?) and man pages. Can anyone tell me what's wrong with that syntax? mark And Lennart blames Linus[1] for why he gets hate mail. We are giving RHEL-7 a pass on this iteration. We have installed it on a couple of test hosts and are not favourably impressed with much of the user interface. At least not from the sys-admin side of things. This is not to imply that there is nothing good in 7. There are at lot of improvements that we certainly value. But it is too early in systemd development for us to waste time debugging somebody else's pipe-dream on our dime. We will see what 8 offers and decide then whether to move to something else. [1]. https://plus.google.com/app/basic/stream/z13rdjryqyn1xlt3522sxpugoz3gujbhh04 -- *** e-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** Do NOT transmit sensitive data via e-Mail James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Fri, 2015-07-24 at 09:05 -0400, James B. Byrne wrote: However, forcing your correspondents to wade through an interminable wall of text that regurgitates the previous thread before getting to the point of the message arguably interferes with proper understanding no less than top-posting does. There is absolutely no need to include irrelevant text when replying to a posting. Trim and Cut were sensible skills acquired by some of us in the 1980's and 1990's. Pertinent points pleases people perpetually. -- Regards, Paul. England, EU. England's place is in the European Union. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 2:17 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1227379 There's ~4 aspects to that bug so it's just going to have to settle out, with the main one being comment 25 where systemd-journald is enabling audit and inappropriately mixing data with different discretion levels. -- Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Jonathan Billings wrote: On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:19:44PM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: I really am going crazy, trying to deal with the hourly logs from the loghost. We've got 170+ servers and workstations... but a *very* large percentage of what's showing up is from his bloody new fedora 22, with its idiot systemd logging of *ever* selinux message to /var/log/messages. systemctl enable auditd systemctl start auditd Now your SELinux (and other audit) logs are going to /var/log/audit/audit.log. Um, no. That was where I started this thread - my manager updated his fedora box from 20 to 22, and there's a bug about it https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1227379, where it appears that the systemd folks have demanded *all* logs, and are multicast spitting out the selinux logs *als0* to /var/log/messages. And I just checked, and yes, auditd is running. So I'm back to trying to find the correct syntax to filter all the successes seen by auditd from getting to messages mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
-Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Leon Fauster Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:20 PM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf Am 22.07.2015 um 17:41 schrieb Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) dave.wind...@us.bosch.com: Sorry for the top post, Outlook defaults strike again. Outlook forces you to write above ? :-) -- LF Perhaps I should say instead that it strongly encourages top posting, and all our internal emails follow that convention. It's habit-forming :-) Best regards Dave Windsor AdP/TEF7 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:19:44PM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: I really am going crazy, trying to deal with the hourly logs from the loghost. We've got 170+ servers and workstations... but a *very* large percentage of what's showing up is from his bloody new fedora 22, with its idiot systemd logging of *ever* selinux message to /var/log/messages. systemctl enable auditd systemctl start auditd Now your SELinux (and other audit) logs are going to /var/log/audit/audit.log. -- Jonathan Billings billi...@negate.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Thu, July 23, 2015 8:43 am, Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) wrote: -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Leon Fauster Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:20 PM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf Am 22.07.2015 um 17:41 schrieb Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) dave.wind...@us.bosch.com: Sorry for the top post, Outlook defaults strike again. Outlook forces you to write above ? :-) -- LF Perhaps I should say instead that it strongly encourages top posting, and all our internal emails follow that convention. It's habit-forming :-) Well, my habit for regular e-mail exchange is top posting thus the person reads my message thus is right to the point why this particular message message was sent in a first place... But when mail lists are concerned, I do an opposite, that is I follow mail lists conventions. I never thought about rationale behind them, I'm just following them. I believe, if some day someone gives reasons why top posting is bad in case of mail lists it will really be great. The only reason I can come up with myself would be: whoever reads message received through mail lists usually has no idea about previous exchange in this thread, thus needs all exchange in chronological order. Which I'm not certain is a good reason, so those who know and insists strongly about no top posting are encouraged to give others the reasons behind that. Again, I'm not top posting on the lists. However, _this_ (top posting) is my regular way in private exchange (and it has good reasons behind it). Valeri Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) wrote: Behalf Of Leon Fauster Am 22.07.2015 um 17:41 schrieb Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) dave.wind...@us.bosch.com: Sorry for the top post, Outlook defaults strike again. Outlook forces you to write above ? :-) Perhaps I should say instead that it strongly encourages top posting, and all our internal emails follow that convention. It's habit-forming :-) Best regards Yeah, and it's an M$ innovation I *really* dislike. I've had disagreements with my wife about that. What was it, Lookout, er Outlook '08 that did that? The *real* issue is that the way email traditionally was, with bottom posting, or intercollation, made it *readable*, and esp. if you come into a thread late, you could figure out what was going on. I don't know of any written language on the planet that reads from the bottom up... and if *anyone* doesn't top post, like a lot of us, it makes it unreadable (up, down, up, down, down, up)... which is why the generally-agreed convention on every mailing list I'm on is traditional format. mark Kill Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On 07/23/2015 09:34 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: On Thu, July 23, 2015 8:43 am, Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) wrote: -Original Message- snip Sorry for the top post, Outlook defaults strike again. Outlook forces you to write above ? :-) snip Perhaps I should say instead that it strongly encourages top posting, and all our internal emails follow that convention. It's habit-forming :-) Well, my habit for regular e-mail exchange is top posting thus the person reads my message thus is right to the point why this particular message message was sent in a first place... But when mail lists are concerned, I do an opposite, that is I follow mail lists conventions. I never thought about rationale behind them, I'm just following them. I believe, if some day someone gives reasons why top posting is bad in case of mail lists it will really be great. The only reason I can come up with myself would be: whoever reads message received through mail lists usually has no idea about previous exchange in this thread, thus needs all exchange in chronological order. Which I'm not certain is a good reason, so those who know and insists strongly about no top posting are encouraged to give others the reasons behind that. Again, I'm not top posting on the lists. However, _this_ (top posting) is my regular way in private exchange (and it has good reasons behind it). The main reason actually is chronological order. But not just for the reply .. but for IN-LINE posting. In a discussion where you need to make points in-line and where you only need some of and not all of the other posts, something that happens frequently on mailing lists, it is very much easier to read that type of collaborated message in chronological order. I mean, you don't read a book or a newspaper article or a blog post from bottom to top, right? Why would you read communications from bottom to top? And it is not really even bottom to top. If you take 4 emails of 10 lines each (and 40 lines total) .. it is 75% down to 100% (original mail)... then up to 50% and read down to 75% (2nd mail), then up to 25% and read down to 50%, then up to 0% and read down to 25%. What if someone made you read blog posts that way, or books or newspaper articles? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Am 23.07.2015 um 16:34 schrieb Valeri Galtsev galt...@kicp.uchicago.edu: On Thu, July 23, 2015 8:43 am, Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) wrote: Perhaps I should say instead that it strongly encourages top posting, and all our internal emails follow that convention. It's habit-forming :-) Well, my habit for regular e-mail exchange is top posting thus the person reads my message thus is right to the point why this particular message message was sent in a first place... But when mail lists are concerned, I do an opposite, that is I follow mail lists conventions. I never thought about rationale behind them, I'm just following them. I believe, if some day someone gives reasons why top posting is bad in case of mail lists it will really be great. The only reason I can come up with myself would be: whoever reads message received through mail lists usually has no idea about previous exchange in this thread, thus needs all exchange in chronological order. Which I'm not certain is a good reason, so those who know and insists strongly about no top posting are encouraged to give others the reasons behind that. Again, I'm not top posting on the lists. However, _this_ (top posting) is my regular way in private exchange (and it has good reasons behind it). well, as you wrote: ... because in conventional spelling systems of western languages, text is written from the top to the bottom (applies also for reading). To rephrase it: the usability is higher while reading bottom posted messages. Furthermore stripping is normally done more (footers, disclaimers etc. disappears) when bottom posted. This cleans the context additionally ... The problem gets worse when both styles are mixed. Try to read a correspondence from a year ago in such a style. Its horrible ... :-) -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Thu, July 23, 2015 9:31 am, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) wrote: Behalf Of Leon Fauster Am 22.07.2015 um 17:41 schrieb Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) dave.wind...@us.bosch.com: Sorry for the top post, Outlook defaults strike again. Outlook forces you to write above ? :-) Perhaps I should say instead that it strongly encourages top posting, and all our internal emails follow that convention. It's habit-forming :-) Best regards Yeah, and it's an M$ innovation I *really* dislike. I've had disagreements with my wife about that. What was it, Lookout, er Outlook '08 that did that? The *real* issue is that the way email traditionally was, with bottom posting, or intercollation, made it *readable*, and esp. if you come into a thread late, you could figure out what was going on. Come to the thread late argument is the only rationale for no top posting in case of mail lists I can figure myself. Plus to have all messages in some standard format. I hope, the following will make piece between you and your wife. In regular e-mail exchange both parties are constantly in sync, thus understand what previous statements this particular message deals with. Therefore I personally find it advantageous in private exchange to have new information - i.e. message I'm writing - be right at the top of current e-mail. This is my current message I want my recipient to read (but the rest of exchange is after it as well for recipient's convenience). I can say many bad words about Microsoft, but this rationale for private mail exchange is something I will not blame them about. So far I collected two arguments to not top post on mail lists: 1. standardized format of all messages with answers (like the whole thread in front of your eyes, and it is always in the same format) 2. easier reading for new comers to the thread: in chronological order. Any others rationales? Valeri I don't know of any written language on the planet that reads from the bottom up... and if *anyone* doesn't top post, like a lot of us, it makes it unreadable (up, down, up, down, down, up)... which is why the generally-agreed convention on every mailing list I'm on is traditional format. mark Kill Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
On Thu, July 23, 2015 10:45 am, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 07/23/2015 09:34 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: On Thu, July 23, 2015 8:43 am, Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) wrote: -Original Message- snip Sorry for the top post, Outlook defaults strike again. Outlook forces you to write above ? :-) snip Perhaps I should say instead that it strongly encourages top posting, and all our internal emails follow that convention. It's habit-forming :-) Well, my habit for regular e-mail exchange is top posting thus the person reads my message thus is right to the point why this particular message message was sent in a first place... But when mail lists are concerned, I do an opposite, that is I follow mail lists conventions. I never thought about rationale behind them, I'm just following them. I believe, if some day someone gives reasons why top posting is bad in case of mail lists it will really be great. The only reason I can come up with myself would be: whoever reads message received through mail lists usually has no idea about previous exchange in this thread, thus needs all exchange in chronological order. Which I'm not certain is a good reason, so those who know and insists strongly about no top posting are encouraged to give others the reasons behind that. Again, I'm not top posting on the lists. However, _this_ (top posting) is my regular way in private exchange (and it has good reasons behind it). The main reason actually is chronological order. But not just for the reply .. but for IN-LINE posting. In a discussion where you need to make points in-line and where you only need some of and not all of the other posts, something that happens frequently on mailing lists, it is very much easier to read that type of collaborated message in chronological order. I mean, you don't read a book or a newspaper article or a blog post from bottom to top, right? Why would you read communications from bottom to top? And it is not really even bottom to top. If you take 4 emails of 10 lines each (and 40 lines total) .. it is 75% down to 100% (original mail)... then up to 50% and read down to 75% (2nd mail), then up to 25% and read down to 50%, then up to 0% and read down to 25%. What if someone made you read blog posts that way, or books or newspaper articles? OK, the shortest I can re-formulate your message is: on mail lists we are collectively writing the book for someone else to read (much less communicating with each other in real time ;-) Any accepted convention is better than no convention: save everybody's time. Suits me (as far as mail lists are concerned). Valeri Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Leon Fauster wrote: Am 23.07.2015 um 18:06 schrieb Valeri Galtsev galt...@kicp.uchicago.edu: On Thu, July 23, 2015 10:45 am, Johnny Hughes wrote: The main reason actually is chronological order. But not just for the reply .. but for IN-LINE posting. In a discussion where you need to make points in-line and where you only need some of and not all of the other posts, something that happens frequently on mailing lists, it is very much easier to read that type of collaborated message in chronological order. I mean, you don't read a book or a newspaper article or a blog post from bottom to top, right? Why would you read communications from bottom to top? And it is not really even bottom to top. If you take 4 emails of 10 lines each (and 40 lines total) .. it is 75% down to 100% (original mail)... then up to 50% and read down to 75% (2nd mail), then up to 25% and read down to 50%, then up to 0% and read down to 25%. What if someone made you read blog posts that way, or books or newspaper articles? OK, the shortest I can re-formulate your message is: on mail lists we are collectively writing the book for someone else to read (much less communicating with each other in real time ;-) Any accepted convention is better than no convention: save everybody's time. Suits me (as far as mail lists are concerned). I consider email as an asynchronous communication, therefore book style convention is recommended. Yup. We're writing electronic *mail*, not text messages (here, you've got 140 char, tell me everything you know), and you don't have a two-line pager screen I see it as a slo-mo group conversation, and top-posting is like the person who suddenly utters a nonsequitur, louder than everyone else is speaking mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Physically dragging the thread back on topic... I really am going crazy, trying to deal with the hourly logs from the loghost. We've got 170+ servers and workstations... but a *very* large percentage of what's showing up is from his bloody new fedora 22, with its idiot systemd logging of *ever* selinux message to /var/log/messages. I tried creating a rule, /etc/rsyslog.d/audit.conf, that reads: if $msg contains audit and $msg,contains,'res=success' then - but that seemed to send *everything* to /dev/null. That was my best guess, based on googling (yahooing?) and man pages. Can anyone tell me what's wrong with that syntax? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Am 23.07.2015 um 18:06 schrieb Valeri Galtsev galt...@kicp.uchicago.edu: On Thu, July 23, 2015 10:45 am, Johnny Hughes wrote: The main reason actually is chronological order. But not just for the reply .. but for IN-LINE posting. In a discussion where you need to make points in-line and where you only need some of and not all of the other posts, something that happens frequently on mailing lists, it is very much easier to read that type of collaborated message in chronological order. I mean, you don't read a book or a newspaper article or a blog post from bottom to top, right? Why would you read communications from bottom to top? And it is not really even bottom to top. If you take 4 emails of 10 lines each (and 40 lines total) .. it is 75% down to 100% (original mail)... then up to 50% and read down to 75% (2nd mail), then up to 25% and read down to 50%, then up to 0% and read down to 25%. What if someone made you read blog posts that way, or books or newspaper articles? OK, the shortest I can re-formulate your message is: on mail lists we are collectively writing the book for someone else to read (much less communicating with each other in real time ;-) Any accepted convention is better than no convention: save everybody's time. Suits me (as far as mail lists are concerned). I consider email as an asynchronous communication, therefore book style convention is recommended. -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Sorry for the top post, Outlook defaults strike again. Best regards Dave Windsor AdP/TEF7 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] rsyslog.conf
I was looking at the manpage for rsyslog.conf, primarily because I need to filter my manager's new fedora 22 logs coming to our loghost, because of the bug that I forwarded (if it gets through). At any rate, I am surprised: under selectors, I see that The keywords error, warn and panic are deprecated and should not be used anymore. Huh? If I only want warn or more severe, how am I supposed to filter - write a much more elaborate RE? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Looking at the same manpage, it seems that these selectors are not really being removed, just renamed. The old names are being deprecated. Instead of Use == === warnwarning err error panic emerg Best regards Dave Windsor AdP/TEF7 -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of m.r...@5-cent.us Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:07 AM To: CentOS Subject: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf I was looking at the manpage for rsyslog.conf, primarily because I need to filter my manager's new fedora 22 logs coming to our loghost, because of the bug that I forwarded (if it gets through). At any rate, I am surprised: under selectors, I see that The keywords error, warn and panic are deprecated and should not be used anymore. Huh? If I only want warn or more severe, how am I supposed to filter - write a much more elaborate RE? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) wrote: Looking at the same manpage, it seems that these selectors are not really being removed, just renamed. The old names are being deprecated. Instead ofUse ===== warn warning err error panic emerg Thanks. I didn't see that. Unfortunately, it still didn't solve the problem (my manager's newly-upgraded fedora from 20-22, and according to the bugzilla bug, the systemd developers want *all* logs, and they're dumping *everything* from auditd, all successes by root jobs, cron, everything - fine, I suppose, for someone debugging systemd) mark Best regards Dave Windsor AdP/TEF7 -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of m.r...@5-cent.us Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:07 AM To: CentOS Subject: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf I was looking at the manpage for rsyslog.conf, primarily because I need to filter my manager's new fedora 22 logs coming to our loghost, because of the bug that I forwarded (if it gets through). At any rate, I am surprised: under selectors, I see that The keywords error, warn and panic are deprecated and should not be used anymore. Huh? If I only want warn or more severe, how am I supposed to filter - write a much more elaborate RE? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf
Am 22.07.2015 um 17:41 schrieb Windsor Dave (AdP/TEF7) dave.wind...@us.bosch.com: Sorry for the top post, Outlook defaults strike again. Outlook forces you to write above ? :-) -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] rsyslog.conf - why the - in this entry? mail.* -/var/log/maillog
In dealing with an unrelated issue I came across this in rsyslog.conf. # The authpriv file has restricted access. authpriv.* /var/log/secure # Log all the mail messages in one place. mail.* -/var/log/maillog # Log cron stuff cron.* /var/log/cron Why is there a - before /var/log/maillog? This character is not present before any of the other log files specified in /etc/rsyslog.conf. I have looked in the documents to discover the purpose of the leading - character in the mail log file specification but either I missed the reference or it is not there to be found. -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf - why the - in this entry? mail.* -/var/log/maillog
On 06/05/2012 09:30 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: In dealing with an unrelated issue I came across this in rsyslog.conf. mail.* -/var/log/maillog Why is there a - before /var/log/maillog? man syslog.conf You may prefix each entry with the minus ‘‘-’’ sign to omit syncing the file after every logging. Note that you might lose information if the system crashes right behind a write attempt. Nevertheless this might give you back some performance, especially if you run programs that use logging in a very verbose manner. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf - why the - in this entry? mail.* -/var/log/maillog
Le mar. 05 juin 2012 10:30:25 CEST, James B. Byrne a écrit: In dealing with an unrelated issue I came across this in rsyslog.conf. # The authpriv file has restricted access. authpriv.* /var/log/secure # Log all the mail messages in one place. mail.* -/var/log/maillog # Log cron stuff cron.* /var/log/cron Why is there a - before /var/log/maillog? This character is not present before any of the other log files specified in /etc/rsyslog.conf. It means that writing to this logfile is not followed by a sync. -- Philippe Naudin ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf - why the - in this entry? mail.* -/var/log/maillog
Hello James, On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 10:30 -0400, James B. Byrne wrote: In dealing with an unrelated issue I came across this in rsyslog.conf. # The authpriv file has restricted access. authpriv.* /var/log/secure # Log all the mail messages in one place. mail.* -/var/log/maillog # Log cron stuff cron.* /var/log/cron Why is there a - before /var/log/maillog? Better question than it appears at first glance ;) . Nothing in man rsyslog.conf on C6, but on C5 man syslog.conf it says under ACTIONS, Regular File: You may prefix each entry with the minus ‘‘-’’ sign to omit syncing the file after every logging. Note that you might lose information if the system crashes right behind a write attempt. Nevertheless this might give you back some performance, especially if you run programs that use logging in a very verbose manner. Now whether that minus is still supported under C6 I can't tell you :) . Regards, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf - why the - in this entry? mail.* -/var/log/maillog
On 06/05/2012 07:30 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: In dealing with an unrelated issue I came across this in rsyslog.conf. [...] Why is there a - before /var/log/maillog? [...] A leading '-' indicates the the log is written asynchronously. It is a performance tune to keep writing the syslog from thrashing the system with syncs. See http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/rsyslog_conf_actions.html -- Benjamin Franz ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rsyslog.conf - why the - in this entry? mail.* -/var/log/maillog
Le mar. 05 juin 2012 17:06:32 CEST, Leonard den Ottolander a écrit: Hello James, On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 10:30 -0400, James B. Byrne wrote: In dealing with an unrelated issue I came across this in rsyslog.conf. # The authpriv file has restricted access. authpriv.* /var/log/secure # Log all the mail messages in one place. mail.* -/var/log/maillog # Log cron stuff cron.* /var/log/cron Why is there a - before /var/log/maillog? Better question than it appears at first glance ;) . Nothing in man rsyslog.conf on C6, but on C5 man syslog.conf it says under ACTIONS, Regular File: You may prefix each entry with the minus ‘‘-’’ sign to omit syncing the file after every logging. Note that you might lose information if the system crashes right behind a write attempt. Nevertheless this might give you back some performance, especially if you run programs that use logging in a very verbose manner. Now whether that minus is still supported under C6 I can't tell you :) . It seems this is no more necessary. From http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/v3compatibility.html : In rsyslog v3, syncing has been turned off by default. OTOH, it doesn't hurt do let the minus sign in place. -- Philippe Naudin ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
