On Thu, 02 Dec 2010 18:11:22 -0800 Russ Allbery <[email protected]> wrote:
> Andrew Deason <[email protected]> writes: > > > You just have to keep one extra copy uncompressed for it to work (or > > that's the easiest way, anyway). Logrotate at least has an option for > > this: delaycompress. > > But our log rotation software doesn't, and we're not going to switch > to logrotate (which doesn't have the other features we want). > > I personally don't care, since we'll use syslog. But I don't think > you want to assume logrotate capabilities. (If the user has > logrotate, they have a working syslogd that's probably an even better > solution.) I'm not saying it will work in all situations; just that it's an improvement over the existing logging mechanism that can be achieved without changing the signal semantics. Like you said, we don't want to implement a big featureful logging infrastructure. You want feature X, go use syslog. Considering I haven't heard much particularly loud yelling about the inadequacies of the current logging system, I wouldn't be so concerned about lacking such functionality. -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
