Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3349 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] syslog-ng configuration.
  • From: Jon Clausen <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 07:09:52 +0200
  • Message-id: <20050525050951.GA4666@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Tue, 24 May, 2005 at 19:21:24 -0400, Ken Schneider wrote:

<snip>

> <RANT>
> Another one of those "better" updates to a program (syslog) that used to
> be fairly easy to configure and now requires six programing classes to
> understand the conf syntax.

Granted, it's different, takes some getting used to, and maybe not worth it
for single hosts.

> This is sure to win over a hole slew of windows converts isn't it.

I fail to see what windows converts have to do with this. By the time they
get around to being interested in alternative syslogging daemons... well...

> What the f**k does this provide that is any better than plain old syslog?

Free text matching/redirection?

Lets you specify different destinations for (un)interesting stuff. Saves a
lot of grepping.

> syslog-ng is supposed to allow you to create/write your own filters (if
> you know "c" programming that is). But whether or not is does depends on
> whether or not you can define your own facility/level which I cannot see
> how.

No.

The point is that the whole facility/level concept is very limited.

Sure you can have syslog-ng match/filter using facility/level, but it's
ability to match/filter on free text is so much more flexible.

That's how I get Shorewall messages from remote routers into

/remote-log/$host-ip.d/shorewall.log

And besides, not all devices that you might want to remote log are equipped
with practical facilities/levels.

> And if you can't why change something that just plain works?

If you like it, use it. If you don't, don't.

> </RANT>

Yeah. I just felt like countering. :)

Cheers,
Jon
--
YMMV

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups