On Wednesday 20 July 2005 02:00, Greg Hudson wrote:
> In
> http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=dev&msgNo=102837,
>
> Michael Sinz raised a good point which received no replies:
> > I may be a bit "old school" here but why is there so much work and
> > effort going into re-inventing "syslog" logging.
>
> [...]
>
> > Windows does have application event logging support [...]
[snip]
> One possible criticism is that using syslog on Unix unconditionally
> would not make it easy to interoperate with Dan Bernstein's
> daemontools as John Szakmeister (I think; both mail archives are down
> right now) desired. It's my opinion that it is not important or even
> desirable to put any weight on interoperating with djb's tools, since
> they are themselves designed without any weight for consistency with
> other Unix facilities.
It was actually John Peacock who was looking for support with daemontools
(although I do use them for some services). And actually, he was looking for
a way to get the errors to STDOUT or STDERR, which I think is a reasonable
request. It's useful when trying to track down errors and set a service.
Then you don't have to clutter real system events with debugging system
services, and you don't have to tail the log in a separate terminal.
That said, I'm all for using a central logging facility such as syslog or
Windows application event logging. I've been helping out a few companies in
our area (who are much more "corporate" than our small company), and their
administrators very much like to push all logging into a single location,
*especially* under Windows.
-John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jul 20 23:06:23 2005