Thanks for this e-mail, that helps clarifying things a lot! I’m going to take some time to see how I can improve our presentation on Debian Wiki to ensure such detailed explanations are not needed again. Le Fri, Aug 08, 2025 at 08:48:18PM +0100, Simon McVittie a écrit : > I think a source of confusion is that systemd-journald is: > (…) > but it is not: > > - an implementation of the RFC 3164 or RFC 5254 syslog protocols[2] > - a sink for system messages written one-per-line to a series of flat > text files in the traditional Unix way I think this is the main source of confusion. By "logging daemons", we were indeed talking about daemons following RFC 3164/5254 syslog protocols. Things like (but not limited to) systemd-journald are very dissimilar to these RFC-compliant daemons, and trying to document them too would impressively increase our workload. Maybe when "traditional" logging daemons have documentation so good on Debian Wiki that Debian administrators are no longer redirected to Gentoo or Arch Linux documentation to set them up, then we can start thinking about broadening our scope to include other daemons that work in their own special ways. But until then, they are going to be our exclusive focus. > There are plenty of other pieces of software in Debian that match some of > these criteria but do not match other criteria, like the logging > infrastructure in runit, daemontools and similar packages, which write > messages to flat text files and are responsible for recording the output of > system services, but are unrelated to /dev/log. Are those logging daemons or > not? For now, runit and daemontools are probably out of scope too, for the same reasons than systemd-journald is. And like with systemd-journald, we might reconsider that at a later point.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature