Re: PROPOSAL: dpkg-logger and related
Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:
> So you now have a complex structure with two different logger programs, one
> of which will only be used rarely so it won't get good testing, plus you
> have a rudimentry re-implmentation of syslog in dpkg-logger, plus you bother
> the user to let them know that the program can't accomplish something as
> simple as logging some data.
>
> Doesn't this seem a little absurd to anyone?
It does to me too.
> The right thing to do is to finish up the configuration management stuff
> instead, the existing proposals for it already take logging into account.
I agree, the configuration management stuff is The Right Way.
Martin.
Reply to: