also sprach Jamie L. Penman-Smithson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.02.22.2055 +0100]: > So why should there be a logcheck-database package at all?
good question. in the long run there shouldn't be. although it could contain all the filters for standard messages, like kernel stuff. > The reason there is a logcheck-database package is because some > maintainers don't know enough about regexp to create good enough > rules for logcheck, or in some cases because they don't really > want to. then we help them. > If the maintainer of courier wants to take over maintenance of > logcheck rules, that's good, however I don't see that this > warrants a bug against either package. Unless some rules for > courier are incorrect? it's a wishlist bug, no? that's what they are for. courier already has its own rule files. thus it only makes sense. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Invalid/expired PGP (sub)keys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver! "the only difference between shakespeare and you was the size of his idiom list -- not the size of his vocabulary." -- alan perlis
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
_______________________________________________ Logcheck-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/logcheck-devel
