Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 30 Oct 2000 01:45:34 +0100 (CET) | From | Igmar Palsenberg <> | Subject | Re: syslog() blocks on glibc 2.1.3 with kernel 2.2.x |
| |
> > It was NOT ignored. If syslogd dies, then the system SHOULD stop, after a > > Huh? "SHOULD"? Why? If syslog dies for any reason (bug, DOS, hack, > admin stupidity) then I sure don't want the system freezing up.
In some cases, I find the syslog messages of more importance then a working system. I like to know what's going on on my machines.
> ( heh... at work on Solaris I monitor 300+ systems, and it's not unusual > to find 1 box a week with syslog not running for some reason or another. > I can't decide whether it's admin stupidity or bugs in Solaris syslog - of > which there are many :-(( ) > > syslog is not meant to be a secure audit system. Messages can be > legitimately dropped.
I find dropping messages unacceptable.
> Applications have been coded assuming that they > will not be frozen in syslog(). Linux should not be different in this > respect. Hmm... it might be nice to be this a system tunable parameter > but I'm not sure the best way of doing that (glibc maybe?)
I needs to be in glibc, yes.
> > Stephen Harris
Igmar
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |