Ahhh... I have to admit that I currently do not really care about rfc3195d. Currently, RFC 3195 is a failure - nobody uses it and nobody asks for it. I've stopped testing it until I receive at least one real-world implementation note.
Thanks for the info, will apply a patch. And, yes, I do not think that 3195 is totally dead. There is a new revision planned, and that may be very interesting. This is why I am not ditching it... Rainer > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:rsyslog- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Pantyukhin > Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 6:05 PM > To: rsyslog-users > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] 1.19.6 updated > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 05:46:54PM +0200, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > > Just for your info: I detected one bug that occurred during bug > fixing. > > I fixed it and re-published 1.19.6 with the same version number > because > > I saw now downloads until then. But maybe my counter is wrong. If you > > have downloaded rsyslog before I sent this message, please re- > download > > it. > > > > Sorry for the hassle, but that fix was probably worth it. > > I had to run 's/sigaction_t/sigaction/' over rfc3195d.c in order > to compile it on FreeBSD. Otherwise it seems to work. Thanks! > _______________________________________________ > rsyslog mailing list > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
