On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 09:42:17AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Todd Troxell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.26.0405 +0100]: > > Yes, yes it should. There was a bug report about this > > somewhere... Gah! > > Yes, I remember, but I could not find it.
Just a general "Gah!", not necessarily directed at you :) Anyway, it's #254542: Change violations.d override > > To be clear, the violations.ignore.d should filter things are the ignore.d > > level. Currently it does not. > > Should we declare it a feature and call violations.ignore.d > a deescalation filter instead? The majority of emails I get about logcheck are confused admins wondering why a rulefile doesn't work, when it's just because lines are being pulled by violations.d. Eh, It definitely makes things more complicated. The benefit would not be great for me, but I tend to read logcheck mails without really caring about which level things show up under. I may be a bad judge on this one, but I'd like to see it changed. Of course, I'm open to discussion about it. -- Todd Troxell http://rapidpacket.com/~xtat _______________________________________________ Logcheck-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/logcheck-devel
