Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:25:43 -0500 From: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> To: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: void <float@firedrake.org>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: syslogd and kqueue Message-ID: <20011026232543.N37284@over-yonder.net> In-Reply-To: <20011027002622.C2586@coffee.q9media.com>; from mike@FreeBSD.ORG on Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 12:26:22AM -0400 References: <20011026233957.A9925@parhelion.firedrake.org> <20011026200436.A61058@xor.obsecurity.org> <20011027043342.A18231@parhelion.firedrake.org> <20011027001704.B2586@coffee.q9media.com> <20011027002622.C2586@coffee.q9media.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 12:26:22AM -0400 I heard the voice of Mike Barcroft, and lo! it spake thus: > > Just to clarify. This is still a POLA violation. If a log file is > pulled out from underneath syslogd(8), one wouldn't expect it to start > logging again, even if the file was re-created. Just like one > wouldn't expect it to create a new log file. Actually, one would. It always takes conscious effort for me to remember that syslog won't create non-existent logfiles. That means I have to go touch a bunch of files when, for instance, I'm setting up a jail(8). It seems extremely counter-intuitive to me that I can't just say "Log to this file" and have it start logging there, without me laying out a yellow brick road. Forget kqueue. Just an O_CREAT. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fullermd@over-yonder.net Unix Systems Administrator | fullermd@futuresouth.com Specializing in FreeBSD | http://www.over-yonder.net/ "The only reason I'm burning my candle at both ends, is because I haven't figured out how to light the middle yet" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011026232543.N37284>