changing the default syslog daemon for lenny?

Quoting Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>:
[color=blue]
>
> [Michael Biebl][color=green]
>> That's mostly because of lots of documentation in
>> /usr/share/doc/rsyslog. If you think that's an issue, I could split
>> out the doc into a separate package.[/color]
>
> This is probably a good idea, for those that need a very small disk
> footprint. Please split it into a -doc package.
>[/color]

Ok, will do. Thanks for the feedback!

Cheers,
Michael


------------------------------------------------------------
This mail was sent through TecO-Webmail: [url]http://www.teco.edu[/url]


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email]debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org[/email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email]listmaster@lists.debian.org[/email]

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Michael Biebl wrote:[color=blue]
> Should, I file a lenny release goal first and wait for it's approval, or
> can I take this thread as consensus that I can pursue changing the
> default system-log-daemon to rsyslog?[/color]

Go ahead and keep up the good work!

Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog

Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
[url]http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/[/url]


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email]debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org[/email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email]listmaster@lists.debian.org[/email]

On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 05:30:47 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:[color=blue]
> Guillem Jover wrote:[color=green]
> > On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 00:11:44 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:[color=darkred]
> > > For 12.) and 28.), I'd file a wishlist bug providing a config file
> > > snippet for /etc/rsyslog.d/[/color]
> >
> > Can we please use /etc/syslog.d/ instead? this way we don't get locked
> > in any specific implementation. I'm preparing a patch for
> > inetutils-syslogd to support that, and it might also make sense to
> > require all system-log-daemon providers to support that dir as well.[/color]
>
> I'd rather not do that. There is no common config file format, that all
> sylog daemons understand. E.g. you can't mix syslog-ng configuration
> with metalog or rsyslog. The additional functionality of rsyslog is
> implemented via special directives, which other syslog daemons won't
> understand. So, I don't think this is a good idea.[/color]

I've just checked a bit and sysklogd, inetutils-syslogd and rsyslog
understand the standard syslog.conf format. rsyslog has additional
directives, but IMO those should not be used by third party packages
that would drop config snippets under /etc/syslog.d/. rsyslog could of
course read configs from syslog.d and rsyslog.d, and admins could
install those under /etc/rsyslog.d/ or edit /etc/rsyslog.conf to make
use of those additional features.

The only daemons not understanding the standard format are syslog-ng,
socklog, and metalog (which is not even on the distro).

My concern is making packages explicitely dependant on rsyslog, when
they could be generic, making it difficult for admins to switch
syslogd and also any future transition to another syslogd.

regards,
guillem


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email]debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org[/email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email]listmaster@lists.debian.org[/email]

Hi Michael,

On Thursday 31 January 2008 00:11, Michael Biebl wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
> > - Involve the rsyslog maintainer in the work[/color]
> I'm here and all ears. I'm willing to work on the necessary steps.[/color]
[color=blue]
> Ok, here we go...[/color]

I just wish to say a big thanks to you for all the work you've already doneon
this. You rock!
[color=blue][color=green]
> > - Document the change by preparing a patch for the release notes[/color][/color]

I guess I c+should at least take over this one ;-)


regards,
Holger

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBHowBRUHLQNqxYNSARAq6TAJ4oHa/znSfwsUSfNAAkSeQii8qMQwCfbStp
iV2bIRSwAuGxWCnFugYmd8Y=
=eDmQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Michael Biebl wrote:[color=blue]
> Quoting Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>:
> [color=green]
>> [Michael Biebl][color=darkred]
>>> That's mostly because of lots of documentation in
>>> /usr/share/doc/rsyslog. If you think that's an issue, I could split
>>> out the doc into a separate package.[/color]
>> This is probably a good idea, for those that need a very small disk
>> footprint. Please split it into a -doc package.
>>[/color]
>
> Ok, will do. Thanks for the feedback![/color]

Done. I've split out the html documentation and now rsyslog weighs
258kb. It's currently waiting in NEW.

Cheers,
Michael

--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - [url]http://enigmail.mozdev.org[/url]

iD8DBQFHppXFh7PER70FhVQRAt8DAJ0Xz9B12ZpvseXvHAGONV/SmFereACcCf7o
9BzLWzqsCRVeDfopu+D+rAc=
=iS7c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

* William Pit****

| I agree with this. Additionally, Balasz Schielder (Balabit) makes people
| who contribute to syslog-ng sign a contributory license agreement [1],
| so that they can be included in syslog-ng premium, which is in my view
| against the whole purpose of open source. If you disagree with signing
| the CLA, your patch is rejected. As such, I feel that syslog-ng is not a
| good choice for the default syslogd in Debian.

FWIW, if you want your patch to end up in any Apache project, you have
to sign their contributor licence agreement. Similarly, for GNU
software, you have to assign copyright to FSF.

The syslog-ng author putting the changes into a closed-source version
(if I understand the paragraph quoted correctly), which is fine as
long as the licence allows it. You might not think it's in the spirit
of free software, but it's certainly something one of the arguments
some people are using to get people to use the BSD licence in favour
of the GPL.

--
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email]debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org[/email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email]listmaster@lists.debian.org[/email]

> rsyslog could of[color=blue]
> course read configs from syslog.d and rsyslog.d, and admins could
> install those under /etc/rsyslog.d/ or edit /etc/rsyslog.conf to make
> use of those additional features.[/color]

This would also be a way to solve #311812.

Cheers,

Bernd


--
Bernd Zeimetz
<bernd@bzed.de> <http://bzed.de/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email]debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org[/email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email]listmaster@lists.debian.org[/email]

Hi Michael,

(sorry for the bad quoting ratio, but I figured it's nice to bring back the
context...)

On Thursday 31 January 2008 00:11, Michael Biebl wrote:[color=blue]
> rsylogd provides linux-kernel-log-daemon and system-log-daemon, so it
> replaces both klogd and sysklogd. The only package depending on klogd is
> sysklogd, so there is no problem here. For system-log-daemon I analyzed
> the packages depending on it:
>
> Suggests:
> 1.) xwatch: sysklogd
> Besides a small example config file, there is nothing syklogd
> specific in this package.
> Should be changed to $default_syslog | system-log-daemon
> 2.) jffnms: syslog-ng
> Nothing syslog-ng specific in this package. Should be changed to
> $preferred_syslog | system-log-daemon
>
> Recommends:
> 3.) anacron: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 4.) fcron: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 5.) heartbeat: sysklogd | syslog-ng | system-log-daemon
> 6.) ldirectord: sysklogd | syslog-ng
> Should be changed to $preferred_syslog | system-log-daemon
> 7.) nullmailer: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 8.) rlinetd: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 9.) xinetd: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
>
> Depends:
> 10.) alamin-client: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 11.) alamin-mysql: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 12.) alamin-server: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> Uses syslog-facility in postinst/prerm. install will not fail if
> syslog-facility is not present.
> Easy to use a fixed syslog-facility or even better provide a
> rsyslog.d snippet.
> 13.) alamin-smpp: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 14.) fwlogwatch: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 15.) inetutils-ftpd: inetutils-syslogd | system-log-daemon
> 16.) inetutils-inetd: inetutils-syslogd | system-log-daemon
> 17.) inetutils-talkd: inetutils-syslogd | system-log-daemon
> 18.) inetutils-telnetd: inetutils-syslogd | system-log-daemon
> 19.) klogd: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 20.) logcheck: sysklogd | system-log-daemon | syslog-ng
> Has used syslogd-listfiles in postinst, was removed again 2002
> 21.) psad: syslogd | syslog-ng | metalog
> Should be changed to $preferred_syslog | system-log-daemon
> 22.) request-tracker3.6: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 23.) snort: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> Has used syslogd-listfiles years again, was removed again
> 24.) snort-common: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 25.) snort-mysql: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 26.) snort-pgsql: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 27.) snort-rules-default: sysklogd | system-log-daemon
> 28.) sympa: sysklogd (>= 1.3-27) | system-log-daemon
> Uses syslog-facility in postrm/postinst to setup a custom facility
> to log to /var/log/sympa.log. Doesn't fail to install if
> syslog-facility is not found, will log to /var/log/messages
> instead. Could easily ship a rsyslog.d snippet.
>
> So, the only real showstopper is 21.), not having system-log-daemon as
> alternative, which makes it uninstallable with rsyslog.
>
> If there is consensus, I'd go on filing bugs (priority important)
> against 1.), 2.), 6.) and 21.), asking for changing the dependency to
> rsyslog | system-log-daemon (or if they don't agree with the rsyslog
> choice, their preferred system-log-daemon).[/color]

Did you file those bugs? Is there a usertag for them?
[color=blue]
> For 12.) and 28.), I'd file a wishlist bug providing a config file
> snippet for /etc/rsyslog.d/
>
> And finally, if it is approved that rsyslog should be become the default
> system-log-daemon, I'd file wishlist bugs against the remaining packages
> to change the dependency to rsylog | system-log-daemon, where appropriate.
>[color=green]
> > - Involve the rsyslog maintainer in the work[/color]
>
> I'm here and all ears. I'm willing to work on the necessary steps.[/color]

I'm still willing to help... :) (But as its obvious now, I have lost the
status on this..)
[color=blue][color=green]
> > - Document the change by preparing a patch for the release notes
> > - Get the priorities fixed by a ftpmaster (assistant)[/color]
>
> Should, I file a lenny release goal first and wait for it's approval, or
> can I take this thread as consensus that I can pursue changing the
> default system-log-daemon to rsyslog?[/color]

Or was it already too late for this?


regards,
Holger

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBH8raaUHLQNqxYNSARAq6qAKCdvQrEk91tf0yIeVnqXYH9vM6V/gCfamj4
MV81DrmmvQYg5hXyy80W7aU=
=yARM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Holger Levsen schrieb:[color=blue]
>
> Did you file those bugs? Is there a usertag for them?
> [/color]

I tried to collect the information at [url]http://wiki.debian.org/Rsyslog[/url] and
started filing the important bugs [1]. The real showstopper bug, which
made rsyslog uninstallable, in the psad package, has been fixed already.

For the remaining ones (changing sysklogd | system-log-daemon -> rsyslog
| system-log-daemon), I wanted to wait until rsyslog is actually
accepted as default syslog daemon
[color=blue]
> I'm still willing to help... :) (But as its obvious now, I have lost the
> status on this..)[/color]

If the wiki page is missing information, please let me know.
[color=blue]
> [color=green][color=darkred]
>>> - Document the change by preparing a patch for the release notes
>>> - Get the priorities fixed by a ftpmaster (assistant)[/color]
>> Should, I file a lenny release goal first and wait for it's approval, or
>> can I take this thread as consensus that I can pursue changing the
>> default system-log-daemon to rsyslog?[/color]
>
> Or was it already too late for this?[/color]

Dunno. We should bring this topic up on debian-release I think to get
more input there. If you want to kick of the discussion, please go ahead.

Cheers,
Michael

[1]
[url]http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=goal-rsyslog;users=biebl@debian.org[/url]

--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - [url]http://enigmail.mozdev.org[/url]

iD8DBQFH8sMrh7PER70FhVQRAu7FAKC/WxMxaYxaQOmAsSU2e8UIjUxIFgCgz2zA
xOvXLWBBXUOFmZVpMlJjgg4=
=aC3a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Hi,

(Please don't cc: me, I'm subscribed.)

On Wednesday 02 April 2008 01:20, Michael Biebl wrote:[color=blue]
> Holger Levsen schrieb:[color=green]
> > Did you file those bugs? Is there a usertag for them?[/color]
>
> I tried to collect the information at [url]http://wiki.debian.org/Rsyslog[/url] and
> started filing the important bugs [1]. [/color]

Only one bug is open in the usertag list, but most from the wiki are not filed
yet.
[color=blue]
> The real showstopper bug, which
> made rsyslog uninstallable, in the psad package, has been fixed already.
> For the remaining ones (changing sysklogd | system-log-daemon -> rsyslog
> | system-log-daemon), I wanted to wait until rsyslog is actually
> accepted as default syslog daemon[/color]

Makes sense, but also makes this goal a bit look like its stalled.
[color=blue][color=green]
> > I'm still willing to help... :) (But as its obvious now, I have lost the
> > status on this..)[/color]
> If the wiki page is missing information, please let me know.[/color]

Looks good to me, thanks.
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>> - Document the change by preparing a patch for the release notes
> >>> - Get the priorities fixed by a ftpmaster (assistant)
> >> Should, I file a lenny release goal first and wait for it's approval, or
> >> can I take this thread as consensus that I can pursue changing the
> >> default system-log-daemon to rsyslog?[/color]
> > Or was it already too late for this?[/color]
> Dunno. We should bring this topic up on debian-release I think to get
> more input there. If you want to kick of the discussion, please go ahead.[/color]

So, hi, debian-release, what is your opinion on this? Do you think we still
have the time to do this change for Lenny or is it too late already?


regards,
Holger
[color=blue]
> [1]
> [url]http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=goal-rsyslog;users=biebl@d[/url]
>ebian.org[/color]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBH83UoUHLQNqxYNSARAp9ZAJ49994CWUsE6lXWR9w7NeSsn7GiMACgxpN7
gC1QZoVd8DJ4gEGVdRuXlk4=
=ugBM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----