|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > syslog-ng-users archives|
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 20:40 +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Robert Fekete <email@example.com> writes:
> >> The intent has always been to use pipe() for named pipes, and file()
> >> for
> >> everything else.
> >> I'm now thinking about introducing a device() destination/source
> >> which
> >> would be equivalent to file(), but follow_freq() would not be
> >> allowed.
> >> What do you think?
> > Sorry if I'm missing something, but do we really need a separate driver
> > that is almost entirely the same as another one?
> It's not a separate driver, it'd be syntactic sugar only. Meaning, that
> device("/dev/klog") would be exactly the same as file("/dev/klog"
> follow_freq(0)), just easier to write, and device() can have additional
> restrictions like not allowing follow_freq().
> (At least, that's how I understood it - a completely separate thing
> wouldn't make much sense, indeed)
Yes, that's what I've meant.
-- Bazsi ______________________________________________________________________________ Member info: https://lists.balabit.hu/mailman/listinfo/syslog-ng Documentation: http://www.balabit.com/support/documentation/?product=syslog-ng FAQ: http://www.campin.net/syslog-ng/faq.html