On 09/06/2010 02:33 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 16:47 +0200, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
> On 09/03/2010 04:28 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>> Unless the patch is trivial, there should be an explanation.
>>
>> In this case, you need to explain why do you want to log to a separate
>> file? Some people are used to having all their log in the syslog.
>>
>
> If there is a problem with ABRT it's much easier for user to send us one
> log file then grep it from syslog, but maybe some info should still go
> into syslog.
Many programs use syslog, for many years. This tells me it generally
isn't such a bad idea - otherwise most people would use a separate log
file.
We already can send the output to a separate file, no additional
code required:
(abrtd -d 2>/var/log/abrtd.log) &
But if you absolutely want to have it in abrt, then at least make it
an option, so that users have a choice how to run it, instead of being
at developers' mercy.
The idea about his was to have a log from time when ABRT crashed so user
doesn't have to run it with some parameter and try to reproduce it.
Something like this will be ok with me:
Usage: abrtd [-dsv] [-l FILE] [-t SEC]
Options:
-d Do not daemonize
-s Log to syslog even with -d
-l FILE Log to FILE
-t SEC Exit after SEC seconds of inactivity
-v Verbose