On 14 December 2014 at 19:50, Benno Schulenberg <bensberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Could you please verify that the rewritten description of --rfc5424 is correct? > I had some doubts about what the original text tried to say. :) > >> +.TP >> +.BR \-\-rfc5424 [ =\fIwithout ] >> +Use the RFC 5424 syslog protocol to submit messages to a remote server. >> +The optional \fIwithout\fR argument can be a comma-separated list of >> +the following values: \fBnotq\fR, \fBnotime\fR, \fBnohost\fR. >> +The \fBnotq\fR value suppresses the time-quality structured data >> +from the submitted message. (The time-quality information shows whether >> +the local clock was syncronized plus the maximum number of microseconds >> +the timestamp might be off.) The \fBnotime\fR value (which implies >> +\fBnotq\fR) suppresses the complete sender timestamp that is in >> +ISO-8601 format, including microseconds and timezone. >> +The \fBnohost\fR value suppresses >> +.BR gethostname (2) >> +information from the message header. Hi Benno, Yes I did try to tell about that, but in usual in-understandable way ,-) I'm not sure if the logger(1) manual should emphasis more that the hostname is the same as printout of hostname(1) command, rather than DNS name of the server sending the name. Configurations where they are not in sync may cause some head scratching & swearing for system admins (especially if hostname(1) output matches with unrelated DNS name). -- Sami Kerola http://www.iki.fi/kerolasa/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
