Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 14:58:55 -0400 From: James Howard <howardjp@well.com> To: Robert Drehmel <robert@ferrari-electronic.de> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.ORG>, current@FreeBSD.ORG, robert@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: changing 'struct utmp' Message-ID: <18409B66-8AC9-11D6-AE66-003065BAAC62@well.com> In-Reply-To: <20020628203526.A8390@alpha.develop.ferrari.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, June 28, 2002, at 02:35 , Robert Drehmel wrote: > If people want a more sophisticated solution, I could also > create a database format using the 'struct uxtmp' like Garrance > and Mike suggested, but with dynamicly sized members, and the > possibility to include only specific members in the structure. > To access members in such a structure functions like > void *utmpx_get_member(struct utmpx *, int which); > could be provided. > > That format would be used for /var/run/utmp, /var/log/wtmp and > /var/log/lastlog. It could be made configurable which members > to include in 'struct xutmp's stored in the last two. Imagine > an administrator wanting to log only remote network addresses, > another one needs resolved complete host names - so why waste > space for both? If this is being messed with, it would be great to see full support for System V utmp records, along with the assorted things they throw in. And if you do not mind breaking a lot of code, you could convert it all to using a Berkeley-style database. Or even better, PostgreSQL. I gonna get smacked, aren't I? Jamie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?18409B66-8AC9-11D6-AE66-003065BAAC62>