On Mon, 15.07.13 14:53, Eric Smith (brouhaha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > The need for > > /var/log/messages filters down to wanting to use less or shell > > built-ins to read the data, which is a valid usecase, but not > > worth the overhead in 99% of cases. > > But it's what people actually use in 99.9% of cases. 99.9% of the > time I don't need the extra information in the binary journal. Making > /var/log/messages unavailable by default has a huge down side. > > If we go to having only binary logs by default, maybe we should also > go to having only binary configuration files by default. It's > basically the same arguments: there's more information available; it's > easier for software to parse; it can be made more reliable; special > tools are OK and people don't really need to open it in a text editor. > We've seen how well that works on Windows. Blech. Nobody is proposing this. Slippery slope arguments seldom are particularly convincing... And it's easy to turn this around: by following your logic we really should get rid of ELF binaries and instead write everything in some scripting language instead, since ELF binaries are, well, binary... It's a matter of finding the right balance: i.e. what can be text files, and where we have to win more by making it binary. I am pretty sure this is a case where we win more by sticking to binary files. It's totally fine if you disagree on this, but I'd still like to ask you to think about whether your specific usecase and specific requirements are strong enough to (continue to) be the default for Fedora, instead of just being your local configuration of Fedora. I mean, you should never forget that on your own machines everything will stay as is: you will install syslog, and things will be exactly as before. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
