Re: [Re: Bug#66535: proposal of virtual package: syslogd]
Hello.
Arthur Korn schrieb:
> Manoj Srivastava schrieb:
> > Arthur> There should probably also be guidlines on syslog-facility
> > Arthur> and the rotating and logging behavior of packages providing
> > Arthur> syslogd, in order for other packages to know what they can
> > Arthur> assume.
> >
> > Can you elucidate? The best way to determine what policy
> > should say would perhaps be for the maintainers of the three logging
> > daemon packages to reach an agreement based on current practice. If
> > you could come up with a draft proposal, it would help a lot.
>
> It's already rolling ...
>
> --------
> |Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 22:44:41 +0200
> |To: Martin Schulze <joey@debian.org>, SZALAY Attila <sasa@debian.org>
> |From: Arthur Korn <arthur@korn.ch>
> |Subject: proposed virtual packages: system-log-daemon and kernel-log-daemon
[...]
> --------
>
> No reply until now. I'll wait another two weeks (I am away from
> July 17. to July 22.), then I'll file wishlist-bugs against
> syslog-ng and sysklogd.
I filed bugs (Bug#67603, Bug#67604) against sysklogd and
syslog-ng but didn't get any response from the maintainers.
What can I do more to get the attention of these maintainers?
They are not marked 'away' in the developers-database.
ciao, 2ri
--
Use the source...
Reply to: