Re: [PATCH] libgcobol: Allow for lack of LOG_PERROR

2025-05-14 Thread James K. Lowden
On Mon, 12 May 2025 14:05:50 +0200 Rainer Orth wrote: > Before going further, I'd first like to understand why you chose to > use syslog in a runtime lib. While logging to syslog is certainly > useful in daemons and such, a runtime lib is different IMO: while > regular users can log to syslog, a

Re: [PATCH] libgcobol: Allow for lack of LOG_PERROR

2025-05-13 Thread Rainer Orth
Hi Robert, > If you have a patch that works for you, by all means, push it. done now, thanks. > As for the philosophy and reasons for logging...I have to defer to Jim to > come up with a cogent response. I personally wouldn't have bothered with > any logging code. There may be some delays in h

RE: [PATCH] libgcobol: Allow for lack of LOG_PERROR

2025-05-12 Thread Robert Dubner
Subject: [PATCH] libgcobol: Allow for lack of LOG_PERROR > > The libgcobol build is broken again on Solaris: > > /vol/gcc/src/hg/master/local/libgcobol/libgcobol.cc: In function 'void > default_exception_handler(ec_type_t)': > /vol/gcc/src/hg/master/local/libgcobol/libgcob

[PATCH] libgcobol: Allow for lack of LOG_PERROR

2025-05-12 Thread Rainer Orth
The libgcobol build is broken again on Solaris: /vol/gcc/src/hg/master/local/libgcobol/libgcobol.cc: In function ‘void default_exception_handler(ec_type_t)’: /vol/gcc/src/hg/master/local/libgcobol/libgcobol.cc:11196:44: error: ‘LOG_PERROR’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘LOG_ERR’?