On 23 September 2013 23:13, Jeff Trawick <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Ivan Zhakov <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 23 September 2013 22:35, Jeff Trawick <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > In 2.4 the syslog logging wouldn't be implemented as a provider, the
>> > ErrorLog directive parser would be different, new structure fields would be
>> > at the end, but otherwise it shouldn't be hard :)
>> >
>>
>> It could be theoretical backward compatibility issue if someone uses
>> log named the same as some provider. Why not add new directive
>> LogProvider?
>
>
> I've never seen a log file within the ServerRoot directory.  The risk of
> such a configuration and it matching a provider actually loaded seems low
> enough (and with an easy enough workaround) to forgo having a different
> configuration directives between 2.4/next-major-release.
>
> But maybe
>
> ErrorLogProvider provider-name arg1-n
>
> would be nicer anyway (same in all applicable branches).
>
Another option to use ':' to separate log provider and arguments. Like
ErrorLog syslog:arg1-n. It could be useful when log destination
specified in command line using '-E' option:
httpd -E "syslog:" or httpd -E "eventlog:Apache2" when Windows Event
log provider will be implemented.


-- 
Ivan Zhakov

Reply via email to