Re: rfc: snmptrapd logging fixup

This is a discussion on Re: rfc: snmptrapd logging fixup within the SNMP Coders forums, part of the Networking and Network Related category; On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 13:57 -0500, Robert Story wrote: > However, there are some quirks to > ...


Go Back   Usenet Forums > Networking and Network Related > SNMP Coders

FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 11-22-2005
Dave Shield
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: rfc: snmptrapd logging fixup

On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 13:57 -0500, Robert Story wrote:
> However, there are some quirks to
> snmptrapd's log handling. So I'm opening a dialog.


Sounds good.
Let's get the agreement out of the way first :-)


> 1) it has distinct knowledge coded in for syslog logging and file/print
> handling. Even to the point of logging differently formatted startup messages!


I would agree that there's no real point in having different startup
messages. That's probably a hangover from the original code history.
When I implemented the handler-based mechanism, I was trying to keep
the changes to a minimum, so retained the existing formatting as
much as possible.
A major-number release seems the obvious time to tidy this up.
I'm not really bothered about the exact format of this startup message.

> 3) Unfortunately, snmptrapd has no documented
> behaviour for opening log files at startup.
> Do we want to add an option to allow appending to log files?


Yes. That's clearly a useful distinction to be able to make.


> 4) For future consideration, it would be nice to add some processing
> to -L to allow per-log options to be set.


Why not tie this into 3) ?
If we're tackling half of the problem now anyway, why not tackle
it in full?


> eg -Lt [truncate|append], which would allow something like:
>
> -Lf file.trunc -Lt append -Lf file.app
>
> where file.trun would be truncated when created (the default), and file.app
> would be appended.


I like the basic idea, though not the proposed syntax.
It feels a little confusing.

Alternative proposal:

-Lf file.truncate
-La file.append

(with the usual interpretation for -LF/-LA)

That would have the advantage of making this behaviour available to
*all* snmplib-based applications, in a consistent manner.



I'll come back to issue 2) (and the remaining bit of 1)) shortly.

Dave


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today
Register for a JBoss Training Course. Free Certification Exam
for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005. For more info visit:
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7628&alloc_id=16845&op=click
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/...et-snmp-coders
Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0