[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?
From: |
Martin, Jason H |
Subject: |
RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ? |
Date: |
Wed, 12 Oct 2005 08:13:32 -0700 |
Ah. In that case I agree about a ./configure specified default that is
later overridden by the config file.
-Jason Martin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Seraphine [mailto:chip@trdlnk.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 8:12 AM
> To: Martin, Jason H
> Cc: Cfengine Mailing List Help
> Subject: Re: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?
>
>
> Martin, Jason H wrote:
>
> >Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of a
> cfagent.conf entry.
> >
> >
> It already is configurable in that way. The problem is that
> some stuff
> still 'leaks through', presumably from actions taken before the
> configuration setting goes into effect. (The daemons don't honor the
> SyslogFacility parameter either, AFAIK, although I haven't tested it.)
>
> >-Jason Martin
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Chip Seraphine [mailto:chip@trdlnk.com]
> >>Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 5:30 AM
> >>To: Martin, Jason H; Cfengine Mailing List Help
> >>Subject: Re: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?
> >>
> >>
> >>Martin, Jason H wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>>your own custom tweaks in (for example, I always change the hard
> >>>>coded default LOG_DAEMON and LOG_USER openlog calls in log.c to
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>LOG_LOCAL1,
> >>
> >>
> >>>>which cuts down on the noise in my messages file).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>Sounds like that would be handy as a configurable value.
> >>>
> >>>-Jason Martin
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Anyone wise in the ways of autoconfig? It would make a lovely
> >>compile-time ./configure option. (I hacked such a patch together
> >>loooooong ago that replaced those tokens with #defined
> values set in
> >>defs, but that patch never made it in; I assumed that Mark
> >>would prefer
> >>it properly implemented in configure.ac rather than something that
> >>requires passing -Dfoo=bar lines.)
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
- RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?, (continued)
- RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?, David Masterson, 2005/10/11
- RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?, David Masterson, 2005/10/11
- RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?, David Masterson, 2005/10/11
- RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?, David Masterson, 2005/10/11
- RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?, Martin, Jason H, 2005/10/11
- RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?, Martin, Jason H, 2005/10/12
- RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?,
Martin, Jason H <=
- RE: No reliable outputs in 2.1.15 ?, David Masterson, 2005/10/12