I checked a bit ;-) > > is it as simple as taking the PR and changing the type name? > > I need to look, but probably not - else I would have done it.
That would cause a lot of code duplication - bad. The proper solution is to control this via options. > > > > > given that we don't have an existing name-value type, what backwards > > compatibility broke? > > We already have one, the iptables type. And we also have the NameValue parser ... I wonder if the online doc is outdated or there is a doc issue. Code w/ comments: https://github.com/rsyslog/liblognorm/blob/master/src/parser.c#L2578 Rainer > > Rainer _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list https://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/ What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad of sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you DON'T LIKE THAT.
