Fellow Debianistas... At work we are using syslog-ng a lot and it's very useful for a central logging server. However I don't like the syntax because it's verbose and typo-prone. So I was looking at metalog and seeing it orphaned I decided to adopt it (#423299). I've started bringing the package into good shape again. There is just an issue with the paths and files where metalog writes syslog informaton to. The difference to the sysklogd...
sysklogd: /var/log/mail.log /var/log/mail.log.0 /var/log/mail.log.1.gz /var/log/mail.log.2.gz metalog: /var/log/mail/log-<year>-<month>-<day>-<hour>:<minutes>:<seconds> Obviously both logging daemons have different ideas of where the log files are located and how they are named. sysklogd uses logrotate to rotate the files. metalog has rotation built in (although I'm sure I can switch it off and let logrotate do the job). I have tried to reach the upstream already on whether the sysklogd filename scheme could be used but didn't get a reply within two weeks. I'd like to hear your opinions on whether alternative syslog daemons would need to use the exact same paths and file names as the sysklogd does. syslog-ng's default config mimics sysklogd's behavior. At least switching from sysklogd to metalog wouldn't be possible without user interaction and confusion. Of course I can live with syslog-ng and probably most others can, too. But then we should consider removing metalog from the archives because it has been unmaintained for ages. :( Cheers Christoph -- JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
