> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] > Sent: Dienstag, 22. Juni 2010 13:56 > To: rsyslog-users > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] feedback requested: NEW rsyslog.conf format -- XML? > > On Mon, 21 Jun 2010, Andre Lorbach wrote: > > > I meant this: > > > > <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> > > <param id="listen">10514</param> > > <param id="ruleset">remote10514</param> </input> > > > > Looks more readable to me as > > <params > > listen="10514" > > ruleset="remote10514" > > /> > > > > Also another advantage is if you have parameters that contain > > linefeeds like message templates: > > > > <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> > > <param id="listen">10514</param> > > <param id="template">$foo > > > > $bar</param> > > </input> > > two things. > > 1. please no 'hidden' linefeeds. I much prefer seeing them explictly specified > with \n
For manually editing the configfiles, I agree, but if XML is used as foundation, I prefer to use either hidden linefeeds or XML-Complaint replacements like &#A; > 2. I really don't like the <generic type=specific> approach, it makes it hard for > a parser to enforce the proper application syntax because it's so easy for > things that won't make sense to the application to exist. I think from an internal configuration tree point of view, it is much easier to read and parse <generic type=specific> approach than having multiple <genspecific>. Best regards, Andre Lorbach _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
