Not at all! :)
--
Alejandro Guerrieri
aguerri...@kannel.org
On 10/01/2011, at 16:20, Stipe Tolj wrote:
> Am 10.01.2011 15:43, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
>> Commited to SVN with the corresponding userguide mods.
>
> thanks Alejandro!
>
> I just did some ChangeLog entry "beautifying", hope yo
Am 10.01.2011 15:43, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
> Commited to SVN with the corresponding userguide mods.
thanks Alejandro!
I just did some ChangeLog entry "beautifying", hope you don't mind my pedantics
:p
Stipe
--
---
Kölner L
Commited to SVN with the corresponding userguide mods.
Regards,
--
Alejandro Guerrieri
aguerri...@kannel.org
On 03/12/2010, at 15:05, Stipe Tolj wrote:
> Am 02.12.2010 18:40, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
>> Ok. I'll write the userguide documentation and commit afterwards.
>
> thanks Alejandro.
Am 02.12.2010 18:40, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
> Ok. I'll write the userguide documentation and commit afterwards.
thanks Alejandro.
I have made some source code intend cleanup, and removed some unnecessary
Octstr* that have been used. So it's a bit more "compact" now. In addition added
the "w
Ok. I'll write the userguide documentation and commit afterwards.
Regards,
--
Alejandro Guerrieri
aguerri...@kannel.org
On 02/12/2010, at 18:15, Alexander Malysh wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I checked other daemons and it seems they allow changing of facility as well.
> Therefore I change
> my opinion o
Hi,
I checked other daemons and it seems they allow changing of facility as well.
Therefore I change
my opinion on this.
+1 for this patch.
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
Am 30.11.2010 um 15:52 schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
> Does it hurt to be able to change it? Really?
>
> I'm all for correctness
it doesn't hurt really but the same argument apply to any specification. Do we
need to be correct in implementing specs?
we have to use standard and don't try to violate it.
I'm -0 for facility config but not blocking. We have to vote for this change.
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
Am 30.11.2010 um 1
Does it hurt to be able to change it? Really?
I'm all for correctness, but extra flexibility is usually welcomed imho.
--
Alejandro Guerrieri
aguerri...@kannel.org
On 30/11/2010, at 15:26, Alexander Malysh wrote:
> I mean, we should not allow to change syslog-facility because it's standard
>
I mean, we should not allow to change syslog-facility because it's standard to
use daemon.
and most modern syslog daemons allow you match program name and some of then
even regex match.
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
Am 30.11.2010 um 14:58 schrieb Stipe Tolj:
> Am 30.11.2010 14:45, schrieb Alejandro
I'm fine with that :)
--
Alejandro Guerrieri
aguerri...@kannel.org
On 30/11/2010, at 14:58, Stipe Tolj wrote:
> Am 30.11.2010 14:45, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
>> That's extremely unflexible imho. If you want to get kannel to log alone
>> without being cluttered with other daemon's logs, you
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 14:58, Stipe Tolj wrote:
> Am 30.11.2010 14:45, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
> > That's extremely unflexible imho. If you want to get kannel to log alone
> > without being cluttered with other daemon's logs, you're out of luck.
> >
> > In our case, we'd like to use it for re
Am 30.11.2010 13:41, schrieb Stipe Tolj:
> looking at the created output to /var/log/syslog:
>
> Nov 30 13:40:28 xxx bearerbox[24686]: [24686] [6] ERROR: error connecting to
> server `localhost' at port `2345'
> Nov 30 13:40:28 xxx bearerbox[24686]: [24686] [6] ERROR: SMPP[smpp_a]:
> Couldn't
> c
Am 30.11.2010 14:45, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
> That's extremely unflexible imho. If you want to get kannel to log alone
> without being cluttered with other daemon's logs, you're out of luck.
>
> In our case, we'd like to use it for remote logging, so we'd use one of the
> "user" facilities
That's extremely unflexible imho. If you want to get kannel to log alone
without being cluttered with other daemon's logs, you're out of luck.
In our case, we'd like to use it for remote logging, so we'd use one of the
"user" facilities to get kannel and _only_ kannel on it, directed to
kannel-
Hi,
please don't allow changing syslog-faility because it's "standartized" to use
log_daemon for
daemons which bearerbox/smsbox/wapbox is.
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
Am 30.11.2010 um 13:41 schrieb Stipe Tolj:
> looking at the created output to /var/log/syslog:
>
> Nov 30 13:40:28 xxx bearerbox
looking at the created output to /var/log/syslog:
Nov 30 13:40:28 xxx bearerbox[24686]: [24686] [6] ERROR: error connecting to
server `localhost' at port `2345'
Nov 30 13:40:28 xxx bearerbox[24686]: [24686] [6] ERROR: SMPP[smpp_a]: Couldn't
connect to server.
it would be nice to ommit the OWN [pi
Am 30.11.2010 12:58, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
> Have you tried playing with the log levels? Syslog accepts up to 7 logging
> levels.
>
> I'll start writing the documentation in the meantime.
ok, my fault, I was looking into /var/log/messages only, where I should have
looked into /var/log/sys
Have you tried playing with the log levels? Syslog accepts up to 7 logging
levels.
I'll start writing the documentation in the meantime.
Regards,
--
Alejandro Guerrieri
aguerri...@kannel.org
On 30/11/2010, at 12:48, Stipe Tolj wrote:
> Am 16.11.2010 20:49, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
>> Prop
Am 16.11.2010 20:49, schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri:
> Proposed patch implements syslog logging on bearerbox, smsbox and wapbox.
>
> More details and a link the the patch here:
>
> http://www.blogalex.com/archives/240
>
> Please review. I'll write the userguide patch if it's accepted.
I'd love to
Sorry, don't have the time.
BR,
Nikos
- Original Message -
From: "Alejandro Guerrieri"
To: "Nikos Balkanas"
Cc: "Devel Kannel"
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:11 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Logging to syslog
Check the patch, that's what
. It would be good to use
> the same archotecture for the rest.
>
> BR,
> Nikos
> - Original Message - From: "Alejandro Guerrieri"
>
> To: "Devel Kannel"
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:49 PM
> Subject: [PATCH] Logging to syslog
>
Good idea, just that wapbox already supports syslog. It would be good to use
the same archotecture for the rest.
BR,
Nikos
- Original Message -
From: "Alejandro Guerrieri"
To: "Devel Kannel"
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:49 PM
Subject: [PATCH] Logging t
Proposed patch implements syslog logging on bearerbox, smsbox and wapbox.
More details and a link the the patch here:
http://www.blogalex.com/archives/240
Please review. I'll write the userguide patch if it's accepted.
Regards,
--
Alejandro Guerrieri
aguerri...@kannel.org
23 matches
Mail list logo