"Robert Brenstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >APACHELOGFORMAT (%S - %j [%d/%M/%Y:%h:%n:%j %j] "%j %r %j" %c %b "%f"
> >LOGFORMAT (%S - %j [%d/%M/%Y:%h:%n:%j %j] "%j %r %j" %c %b "%f"
"%B""%u")
>
> What is a difference between using APACHELOGFORMAT and LOGFORMAT
> commands? The doc just states that Appache users may find the former
> more convienient without explaining as to why. They both seem to
> accept the same format specifications.
logfmt.html also says "The APACHELOGFORMAT command is followed by the
LogFormat from your Apache httpd.conf file".
You just copy the LogFormat line in your Apache configuration files, and
paste them directly into the analog.cfg file, but specify APACHELOGFORMAT.
The specifications are different, which is why the example above didn't
work as an APACHELOGFORMAT, but did work as a LOGFORMAT. Apache, for
example, uses \"%{Referer}i\" whereas Analog uses "%f".
Aengus
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
| This is the analog-help mailing list. To unsubscribe from this
| mailing list, go to
| http://lists.isite.net/listgate/analog-help/unsubscribe.html
|
| List archives are available at
| http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
| http://lists.isite.net/listgate/analog-help/archives/
| http://www.tallylist.com/archives/index.cfm/mlist.7
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
