Jean-Christian Imbeault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, further testing shows that there is a discrepancy in how analog
> handles command line args vs cfg file directives.
>
> If have a config file with:
>
> LOGFILE access.log
>
> and do:
>
> #analog /www/logs/2002/06/26/access.log
>
> I get a bunch of "invalid" lines spewed out. *BUT* if I put this line
> in the config file:
>
> LOGFILE /www/logs/2002/06/26/access.log
>
> and do:
>
> #analog
>
> I get no errors.
>
>
> To me (the uninitiated ;) I would think that specifying the location
> of the log file on the command line or in the config file would
> amounts to the same thing but it doesn't seem to ...
>
> I hope this helps pin down the root cause of why analog does like my
> log file ^_^

You are missing one critical part of the puzzle - you can have many
different LOGFILES in the Analog.cfg, and each one can have a different
format, so the LOGFORMAT directive must act on LOGFILE entries that come
after them. And if you specify the logfile on the command line, it comes
before any LOGFORMAT directives, and therefore they don't apply to
logfiles specified on the command line.

The DEFAULTLOGFORMAT directive will apply to any logfile that doesn't
have a specific LOGFORMAT entry specified.

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
+------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to