From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 19 18:14:32 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D10016A47C for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:14:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@philip.pjkh.com) Received: from bravo.pjkh.com (bravo.pjkh.com [72.36.232.219]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F7DC43D69 for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:13:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd@philip.pjkh.com) Received: from bravo.pjkh.com (bravo.pjkh.com [72.36.232.219]) by bravo.pjkh.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E3F113CD68; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:21:13 -0500 (CDT) Received: by bravo.pjkh.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E9DED13CD57; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:21:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bravo.pjkh.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8D5913C80B; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:21:12 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:21:12 -0500 (CDT) From: Philip Hallstrom To: Zbigniew Szalbot In-Reply-To: <20061019195557.M97577@192.168.11.51> Message-ID: <20061019131953.M64208@bravo.pjkh.com> References: <20061019195557.M97577@192.168.11.51> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: having more than one process write to one log X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:14:32 -0000 > I will appreciate your advice. Is it possible and *safe* to allow two > different processes (dovecot and exim) to write to one log? Better not do it? > I would like to have both data in one log but... don't want to cause > problems. I don't think Windows would allow it. How about FBSD? fopen() seems to say it's okay... ``a'' Open for writing. The file is created if it does not exist. The stream is positioned at the end of the file. Subsequent writes to the file will always end up at the then current end of file, irrespective of any intervening fseek(3) or similar. Another idea is to use syslog.... -philip