On 6/9/2013 at 12:06 PM David Lang wrote: |On Sun, 9 Jun 2013, Mike. wrote: | |> On 6/9/2013 at 10:57 AM David Lang wrote: |> |> |On Sun, 9 Jun 2013, Mike. wrote: |> | |> |> I'm running FreeBSD 9.1. |> |> |> |> When I uncomment the console.info line, rsyslog7 gives me an unknown |> |> facility error. |> |> |> |> Is it possible to enable console.info on FreeBSD with rsyslog? |> |> |> |> |> |> # uncomment this to log all writes to /dev/console |> |> # to /var/log/console.log |> |> # touch /var/log/console.log and chmod it to mode 600 |> |> # before it will work |> |> #console.info /var/log/console.log |> | |> |what facility number is "console"? |> | |> |this is the second time recently that we've had a report of *BSD |> putting a |> |strange name on a faility. The problem is how do we make it possible |> for |> |the |> |*BSD people to use the non-standard names without breaking thngs for |> |everyone |> |else, especially in an environment with multiple types of systems. |> ============= |> |> |> There's never an easy answer to that question. |> |> But I would rephrase it as, how do you make rsyslog more useful to |> users of various OS's when all the OS's may not have similar |> feature-sets? |> |> |> In any case, by your answer, it looks like I need to revert to the |> syslog daemon. | |It's not different feature sets. | |syslog has standard facility definitions, and when they are sent over the |network they are identified by a number. What we are talking about here |are |different names for the same number. Rsyslog implements the name for that |number |that matches RFC 3164 and RFC 5425. If you use that name with rsyslog on |your |*BSD system, it will work. It will even work on logs sent from other *BSD |systems that are not running rsyslog and do use odd names locally. | |I have heard of different names for facility 4 (security/authentication), |but I |have never heard of a facility called "console", and I'm not finding it in |a |google search. =============
I do appreciate the feature set that rsyslogd possesses. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of thinking that rsyslogd's featureset was a superset of the standard syslogd featureset, when in reality it is not. The FreeBSD syslogd has at least one capability that rsyslogd does not have, a capability that I find to be important. In any case, I installed syslog-ng this morning and it works fine, even properly processing the console facility on FreeBSD. Maybe rsyslog needs to update the rsyslog vs. syslog-ng comparison page on the website. :) Thanks again for your quick replies. _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/ What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad of sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you DON'T LIKE THAT.
