On 9/23/06, Jeremy Henty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 12:31:34PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> Doesn't it completely remove the functionality of the syslog to have
> everything dumped to one file?
Um, ... No? :-) The *key* functionality of the syslog is that it,
well..., LOGs your SYStem messages. The ability to split the messages
into separate files is a bonus. I'm wondering how useful a bonus it
is.
It's in fact much more than a bonus, and it's the reason why programs
even bother sending their messages to the syslog daemon. If people
didn't care about the filtering, then they'd just define a file for
their daemon and dump all the info there. Anybody can just open a file
for writing a dump messages into it.
People use syslog because you can define what type of message you're
going to send, and that allows people to filter these messages the way
they want in one standard way.
This small "bonus" even allows you to ignore all the filtering and
dump everything to one file if you so desire. What you're arguing
against is exactly what allows you to have your logs one way and me to
have them another.
I'm done arguing now. :)
--
Dan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
