Re: [HACKERS] Syslog and pg_options (for RPMs)

[Tom Lane]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathan Myers) writes:
> So now the question is, why did they write splogger?  splogger parses 
> the beginning of each message to assign a severity; if it finds "alert:" 
> or "warning:" it assigns those, or "info" otherwise.  To make splogger 
> useful you have to know it's listening.

However, that answers Lamar's complaint about needing a way to control
the syslog level of messages.  splogger might be more useful than logger
for our purposes --- even if we have to carry it along with us.  What's
its license?  A slight tweak of splogger to recognize our ERROR/FATAL/
DEBUG prefixes might be just the thing ...

>> (Curiously, the HP man pages do not say that syslog(3) or syslogd(1m)
>> conform to *any* standard ... hmm ... is logger more portable than
>> syslog?)

> The Linux page says just:
>   HISTORY
>        A syslog function call appeared in BSD 4.2.
> Normally if there's a standard they mention it.

Yes, the HP man pages also trace it to BSD.  I'm surprised syslog
(apparently) hasn't made it into any formal standard.

                        regards, tom lane