On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 22:40:29 CET Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> There are log readers like "lnav" and "multitail" that will become useless
> without traditional log files. "lnav" tails multiple logs by default and
> IMHO provides a very useful interface.
multitail provides -l option to read
Hi!
On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 08:19:46 +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> I am an early adopter (at a time when you had to pass init= to use
> systemd) and I also enabled the persistent journal on practically all of
> my systems. I find myself liking the filtering that is enabled by
> journalctl, but it
On February 11, 2020 6:28:08 PM UTC, Ansgar wrote:
>
>The downside is that magic like [rsyslog disabling persistent journal] might
>not be easily discoverable
>and confuse people who for some reason want a persistent journal and
>syslog.
A lot of my machines are configured like that, mainly
Hi,
On Sat, 2020-02-01 at 13:36 +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Michael Biebl wrote:
> > with today's upload of systemd 244.1-2 I finally enabled persistent
> > journal by default [1]. It has been a long requested feature.
> >
> > The package will create a directory /var/log/journal on upgrades
Hi Michael,
On Sat, Feb 01, 2020 at 04:05:55AM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> with today's upload of systemd 244.1-2 I finally enabled persistent
> journal by default [1]. It has been a long requested feature.
Thank you.
> Users that prefer text logs can of course still install rsyslog by
>
On 2/4/20 8:30 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Dmitry Smirnov writes:
>> On Saturday, 1 February 2020 2:05:55 PM AEDT Michael Biebl wrote:
>
>>> Depending on how it goes, I might ask the ftp-masters to lower the
>>> priority of rsyslog from important to optional, so it would no longer
>>> be installed
Hi,
Thanks for your heads up.
On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 04:05:55 +0100
Michael Biebl wrote:
> with today's upload of systemd 244.1-2 I finally enabled persistent
> journal by default [1]. It has been a long requested feature.
I read this thread and other info, my thought is
Pros)
Well, as I
Arg, typo in the list address. Sorry. :-(
On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 09:28:50PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>Hey Michael!
>
>Sorry for leaving you hanging here. Really busy week...
>
>Michael Biebl wrote:
>>Am 01.02.20 um 14:36 schrieb Steve McIntyre:
>>> Michael Biebl wrote:
with today's
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 10:45:05AM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 07:58 +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> > ❦ 6 février 2020 09:50 +11, Dmitry Smirnov :
> >
> > > > and 2) continuing to use rsyslog isn't an option if the default changes.
> > >
> > > No. I just don't want
On Jo, 06 feb 20, 22:43:50, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> I have one specific request relative to this change that should be
> pretty easy:
>
> Please include in the bullseye release notes a description of this
> change and tell users how to restore the buster logging configuration
> if they
Hi!
El jue., 6 feb. 2020 20:39, Scott Kitterman escribió:
[snip]
I went back this far in the thread to try to get back before it went off
the rails (IMO).
I get that the results of this discussion aren't going to be my
preference. Ok. Win some, lose some. I think it's a bad decision for
On Friday, 7 February 2020 4:22:49 AM AEDT Marco d'Itri wrote:
> If you want to argue that the adoption of popcon is not uniform among
> different types of systems then you need to prove it.
> Expectations and anedoctes are not statistics.
Come on, maybe in theory there is such thing as
On February 6, 2020 5:22:15 AM UTC, Scott Kitterman
wrote:
>
>
>On February 5, 2020 8:43:43 AM UTC, Bastian Blank
>wrote:
>>Hi Scott
>>
>>On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 07:44:25AM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> >> Of course the fact that I can't use all the tools available to
>>> >manipulate
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 07:24:28PM +0100, Ansgar wrote:
[popcon is not indicative of install base]
> That's likely given some libreoffice packages (unlikely to be installed
> on servers) are at ~40% popcon and I would expect significantly more
> server installations than desktop ones.
> So
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 14:14 -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 08:09:13PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > > > On a Debian system _not_ running systemd:
> > > >
> > > > du -sh /var/log
> > > > 74M /var/log
> > Of course it matters. It is about the _default_ setting, or
> On 6 Feb 2020, at 13:25, Ansgar wrote:
>
> I have no problem installing a different MTA than Debian's default
> (exim), my preferred shell, my preferred editor and so on either.
That. The first thing I do on a fresh Debian system is to install
postfix, configure it as smarthost and install
Hallo,
* Marvin Renich [Wed, Feb 05 2020, 08:27:02AM]:
> * Matt Zagrabelny [200204 21:27]:
> > The contents of /var/log/journal will be binary files that journalctl
> > will read. IIRC.
>
> This is my objection to the systemd journal. Binary log files are
> absolutely _horrible_ for the general
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 08:09:13PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 13:41 -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 07:22:07PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> On a Debian sytem _not_ running systemd:
>
> du -sh /var/log
> 74M/var/log
>
> And the binary logs
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 13:41 -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 07:22:07PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > On a Debian sytem _not_ running systemd:
> >
> > du -sh /var/log
> > 74M /var/log
> >
> > And the binary logs from systemd would of course be much smaller
> > since
> >
Sam Hartman - 06.02.20, 17:11:20 CET:
> > "Martin" == Martin Steigerwald writes:
> Martin> Well, that is *exactly* why I thought the GR is not going
> to Martin> be helpful.
>
> Martin> Cause in *no way* it appeared to have *solved* the
> conflict Martin> underneath it.
>
> No the
> "Simon" == Simon Richter writes:
Simon> Adoption of systemd on machines with popcon installed and
Simon> active, which are largely desktop and laptop installations,
Simon> i.e. those cases where systemd provides a tangible benefit.
Simon, I've seen your analysis of why
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 07:22:07PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
On a Debian sytem _not_ running systemd:
du -sh /var/log
74M /var/log
And the binary logs from systemd would of course be much smaller since
they are binary. Any numbers?
It looks like you just proved that this discussion
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 04:49:31PM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
I'd expect servers and embedded systems to be vastly underrepresented in
both of these statistics, but that doesn't mean these use cases are in any
way uninteresting to the project.
Please stop beating the dead horse of whether
Marco d'Itri writes:
> On Feb 06, Simon Richter wrote:
>
>> I'd expect servers and embedded systems to be vastly underrepresented in
>> both of these statistics, but that doesn't mean these use cases are in any
>> way uninteresting to the project.
> If you want to argue that the adoption of
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 16:09 +, Philip Hands wrote:
> > > I solved this by removing Systemd from my systems.
> > >
> > > And now what?
> Well, since we're apparently meant to be obsessed about what it is
> like to accept every default, then let's assume for a moment that you
> are asking about
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 15:08 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Feb 06, Svante Signell wrote:
>
> > There are still a large number of
> > Debian users opting away from using systemd (and still use Debian,
> > not
> > derivatives). And what about non-linux systems?
> This is not true: adoption of
On Feb 06, Simon Richter wrote:
> I'd expect servers and embedded systems to be vastly underrepresented in
> both of these statistics, but that doesn't mean these use cases are in any
> way uninteresting to the project.
If you want to argue that the adoption of popcon is not uniform among
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 11:03 AM Matthias Klumpp wrote:
>
> >From personal experience, all that's needed to switch to the journal
> for an admin is to re-learn a couple of commands and be open to a bit
> of change. I so far found nothing that I could do with rsyslog to be
> impossible with the
On 2/6/20 6:26 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
I solved this by removing Systemd from my systems.
And now what?
Then you're not running the default configuration, which is of course
perfectly fine. As part of switching from systemd to your init system of
choice, you'd also install your
Am Do., 6. Feb. 2020 um 17:12 Uhr schrieb Simon Richter :
>
> Hi Marco,
>
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 03:08:28PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
> > > There are still a large number of
> > > Debian users opting away from using systemd (and still use Debian, not
> > > derivatives). And what about
> "Martin" == Martin Steigerwald writes:
Martin> Well, that is *exactly* why I thought the GR is not going to
Martin> be helpful.
Martin> Cause in *no way* it appeared to have *solved* the conflict
Martin> underneath it.
No the GR did not somehow magically cause people to
Martin Steigerwald writes:
> Martin Steigerwald - 06.02.20, 12:26:32 CET:
>> Vincent Bernat - 06.02.20, 07:58:32 CET:
>> > ❦ 6 février 2020 09:50 +11, Dmitry Smirnov :
>> > >> and 2) continuing to use rsyslog isn't an option if the default
>> > >> changes.>
>> > >
>> > > No. I just don't want
Hi Marco,
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 03:08:28PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > There are still a large number of
> > Debian users opting away from using systemd (and still use Debian, not
> > derivatives). And what about non-linux systems?
> This is not true: adoption of systemd in buster is
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 02:32:57PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Also it does not (yet) mean that I abandoned my packaging efforts for it.
Same here. My packages don't care about systemd either way, so there is no
reason not to package them at the root of the distribution tree.
> But
On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 09:28:27PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> > No. I just don't want default to change.
> Nothing is worse for the debian project than for every single suggestion
> that something change be met with opposition that boils down to opposition
> to change. Things have changed
On Feb 06, Svante Signell wrote:
> There are still a large number of
> Debian users opting away from using systemd (and still use Debian, not
> derivatives). And what about non-linux systems?
This is not true: adoption of systemd in buster is larger than 99%.
Other systems will have different
On Do, Feb 06, 2020 at 13:25:06 +0100, Ansgar wrote:
Given you wrote earlier that you moved all but one of your machines
away from Debian, whatever Debian installs by default doesn't affect
you anyway.
Well, I still use Debian. In Testing you have elogind now as a complete
systemd
Martin Steigerwald - 06.02.20, 14:32:57 CET:
> Ansgar - 06.02.20, 13:25:06 CET:
> > On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 12:30 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > > Especially as I found that I did not use journalctl in my daily
> > > practice anyway.
> >
> > Given you wrote earlier that you moved all but one
Ansgar - 06.02.20, 13:25:06 CET:
> On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 12:30 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Especially as I found that I did not use journalctl in my daily
> > practice anyway.
>
> Given you wrote earlier that you moved all but one of your machines
> away from Debian, whatever Debian
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 12:30 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Especially as I found that I did not use journalctl in my daily
> practice anyway.
Given you wrote earlier that you moved all but one of your machines
away from Debian, whatever Debian installs by default doesn't affect
you anyway.
I
Martin Steigerwald - 06.02.20, 12:26:32 CET:
> Vincent Bernat - 06.02.20, 07:58:32 CET:
> > ❦ 6 février 2020 09:50 +11, Dmitry Smirnov :
> > >> and 2) continuing to use rsyslog isn't an option if the default
> > >> changes.>
> > >
> > > No. I just don't want default to change. IMHO rationale
Vincent Bernat - 06.02.20, 07:58:32 CET:
> ❦ 6 février 2020 09:50 +11, Dmitry Smirnov :
> >> and 2) continuing to use rsyslog isn't an option if the default
> >> changes.>
> > No. I just don't want default to change. IMHO rationale for this is
> > weak but everybody keeps arguing that it would
Scott Kitterman - 06.02.20, 06:27:44 CET:
> >Are you suggesting that voters fully understood the implications?
> >Is this OK now to replace everything with systemd counterparts?
> >
> >I certainly voted with considerations for _init_ system.
> >
> >If I recall correctly, no GR option suggested to
❦ 6 février 2020 10:45 +01, Svante Signell :
>> To not have logs duplicated in two places.
>
> If this is your motivation for the change it is a _very_ weak one, right? Disk
> space is not a crucial problem anymore. Additionally, what would be the
> defaults
> for non-systemd systems running
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 07:58 +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 6 février 2020 09:50 +11, Dmitry Smirnov :
>
> > > and 2) continuing to use rsyslog isn't an option if the default changes.
> >
> > No. I just don't want default to change. IMHO rationale for this is weak
> > but everybody keeps
❦ 6 février 2020 09:50 +11, Dmitry Smirnov :
>> and 2) continuing to use rsyslog isn't an option if the default changes.
>
> No. I just don't want default to change. IMHO rationale for this is weak but
> everybody keeps arguing that it would not be a big deal. In time we will see
> how that
On February 5, 2020 8:44:43 PM UTC, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
>On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 11:01:08 AM AEDT Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> We just had a GR where the project voted it was just fine to systemd
>all
>> the things, so this sort of thing is to be expected.
>
>Are you suggesting that
On February 5, 2020 8:43:43 AM UTC, Bastian Blank wrote:
>Hi Scott
>
>On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 07:44:25AM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> >> Of course the fact that I can't use all the tools available to
>> >manipulate text
>> >> files to follow or analyze logs is problematic. If I'm using
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 09:50:36AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
On Thursday, 6 February 2020 9:04:33 AM AEDT Michael Stone wrote:
Nobody said "exclusively" except you!
It was suggested that default will change and I'm concerned about that.
And yet you said "exclusively" and generally argued
On Thursday, 6 February 2020 9:04:33 AM AEDT Michael Stone wrote:
> Nobody said "exclusively" except you!
It was suggested that default will change and I'm concerned about that.
> Either option has benefits and
> disadvantages, but for some reason you're arguing as though 1) only your
>
Andrey Rahmatullin - 05.02.20, 22:17:14 CET:
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 07:44:43AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> > > We just had a GR where the project voted it was just fine to
> > > systemd all the things, so this sort of thing is to be expected.
> >
> > Are you suggesting that voters fully
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 08:40:29AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
On Thursday, 6 February 2020 6:59:38 AM AEDT Nikolaus Rath wrote:
I would venture that for every user who is grateful that
/var/log/mail.log collects all the various mail-related logs, there is
another user that curses about non
Dmitry Smirnov writes:
> There are log readers like "lnav" and "multitail" that will become
> useless without traditional log files. "lnav" tails multiple logs by
> default and IMHO provides a very useful interface.
> Exclusively relying on systemd logging facilities limits ways in which
> we
On Thursday, 6 February 2020 6:59:38 AM AEDT Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> I would venture that for every user who is grateful that
> /var/log/mail.log collects all the various mail-related logs, there is
> another user that curses about non being able to separate (out of the
> box) the logs from all the
Le mercredi, 5 février 2020, 21.44:43 h CET Dmitry Smirnov a écrit :
> On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 11:01:08 AM AEDT Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > We just had a GR where the project voted it was just fine to systemd all
> > the things, so this sort of thing is to be expected.
>
> Are you suggesting
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 3:03 PM Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
>
> Anyway the big disadvantage of changing default is that now random Debian
> systems will have no traditional logging interface (rsyslog) and we're all
> will be forced to adapt to the new interface in the absence of old one on
> some
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 07:44:43AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> > We just had a GR where the project voted it was just fine to systemd all
> > the things, so this sort of thing is to be expected.
>
> Are you suggesting that voters fully understood the implications?
> Is this OK now to replace
On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 11:01:08 AM AEDT Scott Kitterman wrote:
> We just had a GR where the project voted it was just fine to systemd all
> the things, so this sort of thing is to be expected.
Are you suggesting that voters fully understood the implications?
Is this OK now to replace
On Feb 05 2020, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On February 5, 2020 12:35:45 PM UTC, Ansgar wrote:
>>On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 07:44 +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> Do syslog facilities really have to be addressed by number rather
>>than name? That seems like a horrible interface.
>>
>>Currently yes.
On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 01:25:58PM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> Le mercredi, 5 février 2020, 07.01:44 h CET Scott Kitterman a écrit :
> > Not particularly useful IMO. In /var/log/mail.log I can see log entries
> > from all the programs configured to log to the mail facility.
>
> Unless
On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 13:32 +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > Currently yes. There is an upstream bug asking for a way to
> > specify
> > them by name[1], but nobody implemented it yet.
> >
> > I think a `--facility` option should be fairly easy to
> > implement. Just
> > adapt some code from
On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 01:32:41PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
My impression so far is that the journalctl interface is a regression from what
we have now in every way I care about.
Great! Good thing you can just keep using rsyslogd.
On February 5, 2020 12:35:45 PM UTC, Ansgar wrote:
>On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 07:44 +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> Do syslog facilities really have to be addressed by number rather
>than name? That seems like a horrible interface.
>
>Currently yes. There is an upstream bug asking for a way to
* Matt Zagrabelny [200204 21:27]:
> The contents of /var/log/journal will be binary files that journalctl
> will read. IIRC.
This is my objection to the systemd journal. Binary log files are
absolutely _horrible_ for the general user, but they are terrific for
large data centers.
In a large
On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 07:44 +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Do syslog facilities really have to be addressed by number rather than name?
> That seems like a horrible interface.
Currently yes. There is an upstream bug asking for a way to specify
them by name[1], but nobody implemented it yet.
Le mercredi, 5 février 2020, 07.01:44 h CET Scott Kitterman a écrit :
> Not particularly useful IMO. In /var/log/mail.log I can see log entries
> from all the programs configured to log to the mail facility.
Unless I'm mistaken, exim4 logs nothing to /var/log/mail.log by default, only
to
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 09:43:43AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> However, you most likely don't actually want to tail this specific file.
> It is a solution for a more abstract problem, e.g. "I want to see logs
> from Postfix". And this question got a different answer.
The appeal of
On 2020-02-05 08:12, Michael Biebl wrote:
journald has matured of the years and journalctl has become more
sophisticated with dealing with broken journal files, so I would be
very
much interested in your experience with more recent systemd versions.
Not quite the same issue, but I will note
Hi Scott
On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 07:44:25AM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >> Of course the fact that I can't use all the tools available to
> >manipulate text
> >> files to follow or analyze logs is problematic. If I'm using
> >journalctl, how
> >> do I replicate 'tail -f
On February 5, 2020 6:53:56 AM UTC, Michael Biebl wrote:
>Am 05.02.20 um 07:01 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
>> Of course the fact that I can't use all the tools available to
>manipulate text
>> files to follow or analyze logs is problematic.
>Fwiw, you can still run
>journalctl -f | grep bla |
On February 5, 2020 6:49:07 AM UTC, Michael Biebl wrote:
>Am 05.02.20 um 07:01 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
>
>> Not particularly useful IMO. In /var/log/mail.log I can see log
>entries from
>> all the programs configured to log to the mail facility. That way I
>can see
>> the interaction
Am 05.02.20 um 07:49 schrieb Michael Biebl:
> Am 05.02.20 um 07:01 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
>
>> Not particularly useful IMO. In /var/log/mail.log I can see log entries
>> from
>> all the programs configured to log to the mail facility. That way I can see
>> the interaction between them. On
Am 05.02.20 um 06:08 schrieb Russell Stuart:
> journald has nits I mention below, but I was prepared to put up with
> them and drop rsyslog until one day a server stopped in a nasty way and
> journalctl refused to display what lead up to the crash because it's
> binary logs were corrupt. As far
Am 05.02.20 um 07:01 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> Of course the fact that I can't use all the tools available to manipulate
> text
> files to follow or analyze logs is problematic.
Fwiw, you can still run
journalctl -f | grep bla | awk and what not
which will filter / process incoming messages
or
Am 05.02.20 um 07:01 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> Not particularly useful IMO. In /var/log/mail.log I can see log entries from
> all the programs configured to log to the mail facility. That way I can see
> the interaction between them. On a typical server that is for sending mail I
> often
On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 09:39:19AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> For example, if a certain daemon manifested a condition when a message is
> logged too often, then with Rsyslog I could suppress noise by something like
> the following
This is a workaround for another problem. Fix the real
❦ 5 février 2020 01:01 -05, Scott Kitterman :
> Not particularly useful IMO. In /var/log/mail.log I can see log entries from
> all the programs configured to log to the mail facility. That way I can see
> the interaction between them. On a typical server that is for sending mail I
> often
On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 9:01:55 PM EST Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 5:15 PM Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 5:22:15 PM EST Vincent Bernat wrote:
> > > ❦ 4 février 2020 11:30 -08, Russ Allbery :
> > > >> As a heavy user or Rsyslog features I feel
On Tue, 2020-02-04 at 18:10 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> It does take a bit of retraining to use journalctl instead (and I'm
> personally not horribly fond of its UI, although that's probably
> because I'm using it wrong), but it's a lot better at effectively
> narrowing log messages to the things
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 5:15 PM Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 5:22:15 PM EST Vincent Bernat wrote:
> > ❦ 4 février 2020 11:30 -08, Russ Allbery :
> > >> As a heavy user or Rsyslog features I feel that switching default
> > >> logging system yields no benefits to say the
Dmitry Smirnov writes:
> On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 6:30:03 AM AEDT Russ Allbery wrote:
>> The primary benefit that I can see is one fewer daemon running on a
>> default installation, one fewer thing to have security vulnerabilities
>> or some other problems, one fewer thing to keep up to
On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 5:39:19 PM EST Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 6:30:03 AM AEDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> > The primary benefit that I can see is one fewer daemon running on a
> > default installation, one fewer thing to have security vulnerabilities or
> > some other
On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 5:22:15 PM EST Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 4 février 2020 11:30 -08, Russ Allbery :
> >> As a heavy user or Rsyslog features I feel that switching default
> >> logging system yields no benefits to say the least.
> >
> > As a heavy user, perhaps you're not the target
On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 6:30:03 AM AEDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> The primary benefit that I can see is one fewer daemon running on a
> default installation, one fewer thing to have security vulnerabilities or
> some other problems, one fewer thing to keep up to date, and a smaller
> base
❦ 4 février 2020 11:30 -08, Russ Allbery :
>> As a heavy user or Rsyslog features I feel that switching default
>> logging system yields no benefits to say the least.
>
> As a heavy user, perhaps you're not the target audience for a default?
> You're going to install rsyslog no matter what,
Dmitry Smirnov writes:
> On Saturday, 1 February 2020 2:05:55 PM AEDT Michael Biebl wrote:
>> Depending on how it goes, I might ask the ftp-masters to lower the
>> priority of rsyslog from important to optional, so it would no longer
>> be installed by default on new bullseye installations.
> I
On Saturday, 1 February 2020 2:05:55 PM AEDT Michael Biebl wrote:
> Depending on how it goes, I might ask the ftp-masters to lower the
> priority of rsyslog from important to optional, so it would no longer be
> installed by default on new bullseye installations.
I have a mixed feelings about
On Sun, Feb 02, 2020 at 02:35:19PM +, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On February 2, 2020 12:02:33 PM UTC, Simon khng
wrote:
Why was rsyslog used as the persistent storage instead of journald for
previous Debian distribution?
rsyslog has been the default Debian log storage since before
On February 2, 2020 12:02:33 PM UTC, Simon khng
wrote:
>Why was rsyslog used as the persistent storage instead of journald for
>previous Debian distribution?
rsyslog has been the default Debian log storage since before switching to
systemd, possibly since before systemd existed (it was
Hi,
Not sure if stated in any documentation, but I will ask here since it is
easier to get clarification.
Why was rsyslog used as the persistent storage instead of journald for
previous Debian distribution?
I did not check but is the current journald temp session log storing data
in binary
On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 at 22:01, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> Hi Steve
>
> Am 01.02.20 um 14:36 schrieb Steve McIntyre:
> > Michael Biebl wrote:
> >>
> >> with today's upload of systemd 244.1-2 I finally enabled persistent
> >> journal by default [1]. It has been a long requested feature.
> >>
> >> The
Hi Steve
Am 01.02.20 um 14:36 schrieb Steve McIntyre:
> Michael Biebl wrote:
>>
>> with today's upload of systemd 244.1-2 I finally enabled persistent
>> journal by default [1]. It has been a long requested feature.
>>
>> The package will create a directory /var/log/journal on upgrades and new
>>
On 2/1/20 2:36 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Michael Biebl wrote:
>>
>> with today's upload of systemd 244.1-2 I finally enabled persistent
>> journal by default [1]. It has been a long requested feature.
>>
>> The package will create a directory /var/log/journal on upgrades and new
>> installs,
Le samedi, 1 février 2020, 14.36:20 h CET Steve McIntyre a écrit :
> Michael Biebl wrote:
> >with today's upload of systemd 244.1-2 I finally enabled persistent
> >journal by default [1]. It has been a long requested feature.
> >
> >The package will create a directory /var/log/journal on upgrades
Michael Biebl wrote:
>
>with today's upload of systemd 244.1-2 I finally enabled persistent
>journal by default [1]. It has been a long requested feature.
>
>The package will create a directory /var/log/journal on upgrades and new
>installs, which enables persistent journal in so called auto mode.
Hi,
with today's upload of systemd 244.1-2 I finally enabled persistent
journal by default [1]. It has been a long requested feature.
The package will create a directory /var/log/journal on upgrades and new
installs, which enables persistent journal in so called auto mode.
If you decide, that
96 matches
Mail list logo
