On 09/07/2019 10.35, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > If virtlogd is active, we do *not* want logrotate doing anything at all. Are you saying that to fix the bug at hand, I should be required to first implement 2 features in virtlogd and replace the current logrotate config (none of which caused the bug)? > Trying to get sensible interaction between two separate log rotation > apps is adding too much complexity. It is not added. It is already there. Multiple distros I checked ship this as the default config. Sorry, if that wasn't your intention. > Further, any purging of log files needs to take in to account what > guests actually exist in libvirt. The proposed change has no such > checks. It must only purge log files for guests which are neither > running, nor have any persistent config on disk, and where the log > file is older than "N days" for some configurable "N". Not if time based rotation is already desired, then there is no need to know if the guest still exists. If its not desired, then this is as complicated as you say, but the existing logrotate config already doesn't fulfill that. -- Best regards, Jan Zerebecki -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
