Re: Unified log handling

[Lars Wirzenius <liw@iki.fi>]

cfm@maine.com:
> <RANT>Yeah, and the only reason we have logrotate on our machines now
> is because **lilo** depends on it.  Go figure.</RANT>

According to the Packages file for testing (from yesterday from a private
mirror), there are some other other packages that depend on logrotate
as well:

    boa            bsmtpd         cricket        cron           fwctl
    gopherd        ippl           junkbuster     leafnode       linuxconf
    mailman        muddleftpd     smtpfeed       super          sympa
    syslog-ng      taper          wn             wu-ftpd        wwwoffle
    xtide

I assume that packages that produce logs directly into /var/log and can
live with the default configuration don't need to depend on logrotate
directly themselves. It's installed on the system anyway and the defaults
deal with all files in /var/log (but not it's subdirectories, I think,
though I can't figure it out from the manual page just now).

Speaking from a system admnistrator's point of view, I agree with Aaron,
logrotate is a good thing and every log producing package should use it
instead of doing things itself with cron and other tools. As it happens,
that's what our policy suggests as well.

I should fix my own log producing package to do that as well. Stupid me.

-- 
Lars Wirzenius <liw@iki.fi>
Brannigan's Special Ale, anyone?