[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Using old (not systemd) system logs



On 2025-12-12 at 10:16, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 08:30:22AM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> 
>> I wrote:
>>> Text logs can be read with any of half a dozen or so commands in
>>> my path.  They can be read with busybox.  They can be read on
>>> systems lacking Systemd.  They can be read on other operating
>>> systems.
>> 
>> tomás writes:
>>> I'd bet that any of those are using the sd_journal programming 
>>> interface, thus link to libsystemd0.
>> 
>> Why would simple editors such as nano use that interface?  It has 
>> nothing to do with text files.  Busybox depends only on libc6. 
>> Busybox-static depends on nothing.  libsystemd0 is not present on 
>> Devuan, FreeBSD, or Microsoft Windows. All of the above can be used
>> to read text files.  Which ones can read systemd journals?
> 
> I'll take your word that nano can view systemd journal files
> (although I haven't checked). But I can't believe they have an own,
> independent implementation until I see it.
> 
> Same for busybox.

...I think there must be a miscommunication here.

Where do you get the idea that John is saying that nano, busybox, etc.,
can view systemd journal files?

I read him as saying that those tools can all be used to view plain-text
log files, and that the fact that so many tools can do so is a reason to
prefer plain-text log file storage formats, whereas the fact that so few
tools can read systemd journal files is a reason to not prefer that log
file storage format.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: