Re: [logcheck] I hear you...
On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, Steve Greenland wrote:
>On 25-Nov-01, 00:18 (CST), John Galt <galt@inconnu.isu.edu> wrote:
>> >The whole [OK], [FAILED], etc thing that RedHat does with colors is nice,
>> >but not really necessary. While some additional things can be useful,
>> >others are mainly eye candy. I believe adding the kind of success/failure
>> >system RedHat uses is mainly eyecandy.
>>
>> THAT'S NOT A REDHAT-ISM. HP-UX has done it since at least v8, released
>> in '95.
>
>And I didn't think much of it then, either, since the actual error
>message is not shown, and may or may not have been logged.
It is logged, in HP's equivalent of dmesg. However, I'd much prefer HP's
implementation to RootHat's, because RootHat's pukes over dmesg logs
uniformly: both tend to have glossed-over logs, but HP's isn't full of
escape characters from the damn script. The ultimate would be use HP's
method, suitably modified for FHS, and use the typical Debian bootup
going to that logfile, with the nice nice on the console. Everybody's
happy: you still get the debugging in a file that everyone knows where it
is, and you get neat point-n-drool stuff at bootup like ManDreck and
RootHat.
>Steve
>
--
The early worm gets the bird.
Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who!
Reply to: