Re: taming syslog
On 15/12/13 05:43, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>> So I thought I'd try to suppress these messages in syslog. Some googling
>> and reading man (5) syslog.conf, I decided that the line
>
> On Debian Wheezy the default is now rsyslog which has replaced the
> previous sysklogd package. AFAIK the rsyslog uses /etc/rsyslog.conf
> not /etc/syslog.conf and the man page is rsyslog.conf not syslog.conf.
> Which means you are probably still using the previous sysklogd
> package. In which case you might try installing the new rsyslog as
> that is the current maintenance track. I can't say that things will
> work but since it is different software it might behave differently.
> It might work. But the previous sysklogd should too. And if the new
> rsyslog does not then at least it is the current package in Wheezy and
> the maintainers would be available for bug reports.
>
> # apt-get install rsyslog
>
>> *.*;auth,authpriv.none -/var/log/syslog
>> was the culprit, and changed it to
>> *.*;auth,authpriv.none;!mail.* -/var/log/syslog
>
> I didn't try it but it seems reasonable to me.
>
>> Unfortunately, now nothing gets logged to syslog; I would at least
>> expect the usual crop of iptables reports, unless the baddies have given
>> up for christmas. Mail is still logged to mail.log, so that's OK.
>
> You can always test by using the "logger" command. Try sending a
> message there.
>
> $ logger -t foo "a test message"
>
>> Can anyone please tell me the correct way to go about this, please?
>
> What you did looked okay to me. But note that I didn't have time to
> try it.
>
> Bob
>
Well, just in case this turns up in the archives,
I installed rsyslog to replace sysklog, and edited rsyslog.conf which
made absolutely no difference.
It turns out that the correct syntax was
*.*;auth,authpriv.none;mail.!* -/var/log/syslog
Well, Bah! I think
*.*;auth,authpriv.none;mail.none -/var/log/syslog
would have worked too, but I'm happy with the present setup.
--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:tony@vanderhoff.org
Ariège, France |
Reply to: