[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Syslog facility (Side Note)
From: |
Andrew Stribblehill |
Subject: |
Re: Syslog facility (Side Note) |
Date: |
Mon, 29 Sep 2003 10:28:37 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
Quoting Mark Burgess <Mark.Burgess@iu.hio.no> (2003-09-27 07:45:43 BST):
>
> Is this a commercial product? That would make it rather
> inapplicable. But if it were easy to support as an alternative, I'd be
> willing.
"Clients" of syslog don't need to do anything different. It's just
that the syslogd is replaced with a better one.
So yes, it's trivial to support (the null diff), and yes I agree that
it's vastly superior to the traditional syslogd.
--
SOLE
WEST OR SOUTHWEST VEERING NORTHWEST 3 OR 4, OCCASIONALLY 5 AT FIRST.
RAIN OR SHOWERS. MODERATE OR GOOD
- Syslog facility, Mark . Burgess, 2003/09/26
- Re: Syslog facility, Jeff Wasilko, 2003/09/26
- Re: Syslog facility, Chip Seraphine, 2003/09/26
- Re: Syslog facility, John Sechrest, 2003/09/26
- Re: Syslog facility, Chip Seraphine, 2003/09/26
- RE: Syslog facility (Side Note), Wayne Sweatt, 2003/09/27
- Re: Syslog facility (Side Note), Mark . Burgess, 2003/09/27
- Re: Syslog facility (Side Note), warren, 2003/09/27
- Re: Syslog facility (Side Note), Systems Administrator, 2003/09/28
- Re: Syslog facility (Side Note),
Andrew Stribblehill <=
- Re: Syslog facility (Side Note), Chip Seraphine, 2003/09/29
- Re: Syslog facility (Side Note), Mark Burgess, 2003/09/29
Re: Syslog facility, Frank Smith, 2003/09/26