Summary: | [patch] logger(1) direct logging to other hosts | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | Base System | Reporter: | Mikhail T. <freebsd-2024> | ||||
Component: | bin | Assignee: | freebsd-bugs (Nobody) <bugs> | ||||
Status: | Closed Feedback Timeout | ||||||
Severity: | Affects Only Me | CC: | bapt, eugen | ||||
Priority: | Normal | ||||||
Version: | 3.1-STABLE | ||||||
Hardware: | Any | ||||||
OS: | Any | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Mikhail T.
1999-04-23 18:10:01 UTC
Hi, the propossed change to logger(1) was done in version 1.6 for 5-CURRENT. It is not yet in 4-STABLE. The calls for syslog(3) et al weren't updated. Is it still needed to send log information to a remote host without syslogd locally running? Marc =the propossed change to logger(1) was done in version 1.6 for =5-CURRENT. It is not yet in 4-STABLE. =The calls for syslog(3) et al weren't updated. =Is it still needed to send log information to a remote host without =syslogd locally running? My reasoning was that since the functionality will be present in the system anyway, it would be better to place it into a library, from where it can be used by other programs. This would benefit systems running in embedded installations, which would prefer not to run the whole syslog of their own, as well as others... Locking the functionality inside a utility, while seemingly trying to keep the libc cleaner, will only encourage ugliness like system("logger ...") :-\ -mi State Changed From-To: open->closed proposed change already committed; feedback timeout Marc's question from 2003 made little sense -- the submitter's opinion on it being desirable for libc to offer the functionality is not affected by logger(1)'s cleanup, and I presumed the question to be rhetorical. Thus "feedback timeout" resolution is incorrect, in my opinion. Yes, I do believe, libc should offer a function to send syslog datagram directly to a different host. And -- 12 years ago -- I submitted a patch, that does this... -mi State Changed From-To: closed->open After a more careful reading I agree with mi logger(1) got "-h" option long time ago. An idea of implementing this in a library got no attention (read: patch) over 10 years. There is no point in keeping this PR open for another decade. If one has an implementation, please fill new PR for a library enhancement. (In reply to Eugene Grosbein from comment #6) > An idea of implementing this in a library got no attention (read: patch) over > 10 years. There is no point in keeping this PR open for another decade. If > one has an implementation, please fill new PR for a library enhancement. What? My 18 year-old patch does modify libc/gen/syslog.c adding two new library functions: syslogh and vsyslogh -- including man-page additions documenting both. The ticket's very first comment mentions this, as do some of the follow-up comments. How could you have missed that?.. (In reply to Mikhail T. from comment #7) Sorry, misses that indeed. Would you like to re-format your patch for modern code base? (In reply to Eugene Grosbein from comment #8) > Would you like to re-format your patch for modern code base? That would have to wait for a weekend... Meanwhile could you look at Bug #210537, where I have just done a similar refreshening? Thanks! |