syslogpm - OS2

This is a discussion on syslogpm - OS2 ; Are the log enrties that can be displayed by syslogpm.exe useful? Would it be worth having these entries go into a regular syslogd logfile? -- M Greene IRC (MikeG) OS/2 Stuff : http://members.cox.net/greenemk/os2/ My OpenWatcom : http://members.cox.net/mikeos2/...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: syslogpm

  1. syslogpm


    Are the log enrties that can be displayed by syslogpm.exe useful? Would
    it be worth having these entries go into a regular syslogd logfile?

    --
    M Greene

    IRC (MikeG)

    OS/2 Stuff : http://members.cox.net/greenemk/os2/
    My OpenWatcom : http://members.cox.net/mikeos2/

  2. Re: syslogpm

    Sir:

    Michael Greene wrote:
    > Are the log enrties that can be displayed by syslogpm.exe useful? Would
    > it be worth having these entries go into a regular syslogd logfile?
    >

    Almost without exception they are not useful. There is no one to fix
    the numerous errors and exceptions reported there that occur in the
    Workplace shell and elsewhere. I would not be surprised that the ID
    number of these reports on my machine has wrapped several times and it
    is now at 50,xxx and counting. I've only had this machine on for about
    twenty minutes and there has been 15 errors recorded. There are so many
    errors, that the buffer wraps at two and half days. The WPS is so
    stable because the exception handlers do something sensible with these
    errors already. Thus, there is little motive to fix these bugs.
    --
    Bill
    Thanks a Million!

  3. Re: syslogpm

    William L. Hartzell wrote:
    > Sir:
    >
    > Michael Greene wrote:
    >
    >> Are the log enrties that can be displayed by syslogpm.exe useful? Would
    >> it be worth having these entries go into a regular syslogd logfile?
    >>

    > Almost without exception they are not useful. There is no one to fix
    > the numerous errors and exceptions reported there that occur in the
    > Workplace shell and elsewhere. I would not be surprised that the ID
    > number of these reports on my machine has wrapped several times and it
    > is now at 50,xxx and counting. I've only had this machine on for about
    > twenty minutes and there has been 15 errors recorded. There are so many
    > errors, that the buffer wraps at two and half days. The WPS is so
    > stable because the exception handlers do something sensible with these
    > errors already. Thus, there is little motive to fix these bugs.


    Bill,

    I know they can be filtered to a severity of = or > than 1. The crap
    entries look like they are the severity of 0.

    Anyway, I think about 4 or 5 people are using my syslogd version. While
    I did it for my needs, I had a couple emails asking for a logfile
    truncate and rotate option. So when I changed the source from my short
    hand C++ to C (OW C seems better than C++), I added those options. I was
    just wondering if an additional option to throw the syslogpm messages in
    with the poplog and innotek error logs would be worth the trouble.



    --
    M Greene

    IRC (MikeG)

    OS/2 Stuff : http://members.cox.net/greenemk/os2/
    My OpenWatcom : http://members.cox.net/mikeos2/

  4. Re: syslogpm

    Sir:

    Michael Greene wrote:
    > William L. Hartzell wrote:
    >> Sir:
    >>
    >> Michael Greene wrote:
    >>
    >>> Are the log enrties that can be displayed by syslogpm.exe useful? Would
    >>> it be worth having these entries go into a regular syslogd logfile?
    >>>

    >> Almost without exception they are not useful. There is no one to fix
    >> the numerous errors and exceptions reported there that occur in the
    >> Workplace shell and elsewhere. I would not be surprised that the ID
    >> number of these reports on my machine has wrapped several times and it
    >> is now at 50,xxx and counting. I've only had this machine on for about
    >> twenty minutes and there has been 15 errors recorded. There are so many
    >> errors, that the buffer wraps at two and half days. The WPS is so
    >> stable because the exception handlers do something sensible with these
    >> errors already. Thus, there is little motive to fix these bugs.

    >
    > Bill,
    >
    > I know they can be filtered to a severity of = or > than 1. The crap
    > entries look like they are the severity of 0.
    >
    > Anyway, I think about 4 or 5 people are using my syslogd version. While
    > I did it for my needs, I had a couple emails asking for a logfile
    > truncate and rotate option. So when I changed the source from my short
    > hand C++ to C (OW C seems better than C++), I added those options. I was
    > just wondering if an additional option to throw the syslogpm messages in
    > with the poplog and innotek error logs would be worth the trouble.
    >
    >
    >

    It seems that all my severity 2 or higher errors are WPS errors. The
    PMWP.DLL handles these errors. On my machine they seem evenly split
    between the severity 2 And zero classes. If that is all the information
    that is reported, what is shown by syslogPM, then there is nothing to be
    gained. I do see that I can turn it off, which I've now done.
    --
    Bill
    Thanks a Million!

  5. Re: syslogpm

    In fact you can turn off logging. You just have to register the events with
    ID and Vendor ID etc and add them to the "Not to log" list.

    Lars

    "William L. Hartzell" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:c1.2b5.2zMVMp$2ND@12-237-213-129.client.comcast.net...
    > Sir:
    >
    > Michael Greene wrote:
    >> Are the log enrties that can be displayed by syslogpm.exe useful? Would
    >> it be worth having these entries go into a regular syslogd logfile?
    >>

    > Almost without exception they are not useful. There is no one to fix the
    > numerous errors and exceptions reported there that occur in the Workplace
    > shell and elsewhere. I would not be surprised that the ID number of these
    > reports on my machine has wrapped several times and it is now at 50,xxx
    > and counting. I've only had this machine on for about twenty minutes and
    > there has been 15 errors recorded. There are so many errors, that the
    > buffer wraps at two and half days. The WPS is so stable because the
    > exception handlers do something sensible with these errors already. Thus,
    > there is little motive to fix these bugs.
    > --
    > Bill
    > Thanks a Million!




  6. Re: syslogpm

    Lars Erdmann schrieb:
    > In fact you can turn off logging. You just have to register the events with
    > ID and Vendor ID etc and add them to the "Not to log" list.
    >
    > Lars
    >


    It's the "FFST Configuration" Program. You can add entries to the Probes
    Inactivation list by adding vendor tag, product tag and revision.
    You get these values by copying them from the corresponding error message.

    Lars

  7. Re: syslogpm

    Michael Greene schrieb:
    > Are the log enrties that can be displayed by syslogpm.exe useful? Would
    > it be worth having these entries go into a regular syslogd logfile?
    >

    Just for information: There is an API for access to the System Log that
    is described in the "Problem Determination Programmer's Guide"
    documentation contained in the OS/2 toolkit.

    You just have to link to "lfapi.lib" (and possibly "libuls.lib"), then
    you will be able to use
    LogOpenFile,LogReadEntry,LogFormatEntry,LogCloseFi le to read the System
    log. You can also register for notifications
    (LogOpenEventNotification,LogWaitEvent,LogCloseEve ntNotification, your
    application blocks waiting for events and whenever an event is added to
    the System log your application is unblocked).

    Lars

  8. Re: syslogpm

    Lars Erdmann wrote:
    > Michael Greene schrieb:
    >
    >> Are the log enrties that can be displayed by syslogpm.exe useful? Would
    >> it be worth having these entries go into a regular syslogd logfile?
    >>

    > Just for information: There is an API for access to the System Log that
    > is described in the "Problem Determination Programmer's Guide"
    > documentation contained in the OS/2 toolkit.
    >
    > You just have to link to "lfapi.lib" (and possibly "libuls.lib"), then
    > you will be able to use
    > LogOpenFile,LogReadEntry,LogFormatEntry,LogCloseFi le to read the System
    > log. You can also register for notifications
    > (LogOpenEventNotification,LogWaitEvent,LogCloseEve ntNotification, your
    > application blocks waiting for events and whenever an event is added to
    > the System log your application is unblocked).
    >
    > Lars


    Lars,

    Yes I found the API but since nothing of concern gets recorded I will
    just leave it alone.

    --
    M Greene

    IRC (MikeG)

    OS/2 Stuff : http://members.cox.net/greenemk/os2/
    My OpenWatcom : http://members.cox.net/mikeos2/

+ Reply to Thread