On Thu, 18.07.13 11:30, Orion Poplawski (orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > On 07/18/2013 06:19 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > >On Thu, 18.07.13 10:34, Vít Ondruch (vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > >>Dne 18.7.2013 01:02, Lennart Poettering napsal(a): > >>>So, maybe, instead of dropping the "Provides syslog" thing from > >>>journald, maybe we should add an explicit "syslog-files" dependency (or > >>>something named like that) and then make the classic syslog > >>>implementations provide that and the packages which actually need > >>>/var/log/messages pull that it? > >>> > >>>Lennart > >>> > >> > >>So why there are files in /var/log and there is not obvious package, > >>which creates them (unless you want to guess by name)? Shouldn't all > >>package, which creates log in /var/log have some virtual provide to > >>make it obvious? Why not do it properly/consistently? > > > >So, you suggest using "Requires: /var/log/messages" and "Provides: > >/var/log/messages" as indication for this, and the %ghost > >/var/log/messages in the packages in question? > > > >Sounds good to me! Matthew? > > > >Lennart > > > > But what is going to require /var/log/messages? Programs like > logwatch and logrotate can operate on *any* file in /var/log (or > elsewhere for that matter). They can be useful without > /var/log/messages. logrotate certainly shouldn require this, as in its defualt config it does not reference /var/log/messages at all. logwatch probably should require it as long as it doesn't "speak journal", as the data its rules look for is in /var/log/messages. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
