Moin! On Jun 6, 2008, at 05:57 , John Plocher wrote:
> Octave Orgeron wrote: >> 1. We stick with logadm, forget logrotate, and perhaps enhance >> logadm? >> 2. We drop logadm and switch to logrotate. >> 3. Standardize on logadm and make it handle logrotate.conf syntax >> in addition to the logadm.conf syntax. >> 4. Standardize on logrotate and make it handle logadm.conf syntax >> in addition to the logrotate.conf syntax. At least the last is IMHO a bad idea as logadm.conf shouldn't be edited (I now you can but then you are responsible for errors) with a text editor but instead manipulated by the logadm command line tool. I see this and other tools that behave this way in Solaris as a good way forward, using logrotate or logadm with plain text file for configuration IMHO would be a step backwards. Logadm works, we got used to it, so why change it? >> and maybe > > 5. Ship logadm as usual. Put logrotate into the IPS non-core > repo for people to pull if desired (with all the caveats and > warning comments mentioned in this thread...), but ensure > that it does not get installed by default. That's a possibility. Choice always is good, but it shouldn't be default and if the new packaging system (haven't looked into it yet) supports multiple software repositories it maybe would be a good idea to do a linux compatibility repository and put it in there. So long -Ralf --- Ralf Weber e: opensolaris at fl1ger.de
