| 1 |
Marc Joliet <marcec@×××.de> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>> Can you do all that with the binary files created by systemd? I can't |
| 4 |
>> even read them on a working system. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> What Canek and Rich already said is good, but I'll just add this: it's not like |
| 7 |
> you can't run a classic syslog implementation alongside the systemd journal. |
| 8 |
> On my systems, by *default*, syslog-ng kept working as usual, getting the logs |
| 9 |
> from the systemd journal. If you want to go further, you can even configure |
| 10 |
> the journal to not store logs permanently, so that you *only* end up with |
| 11 |
> plain-text logs on your system (Duncan on gentoo-amd64 went this way). |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> So no, the format that the systemd journal uses is most decidedly *not* a reason |
| 14 |
> against using systemd. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
It is only one of the many reasons. I don't find it advantageous to |
| 17 |
have to waste additional resources to be able to read the log files. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> Personally, I'm probably going to uninstall syslog-ng, because journalctl is |
| 20 |
> *such* a nice way to read logs, so why run something whose output I'll never |
| 21 |
> read again? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
If you like it, nobody prevents you from using it. It's good to have |
| 24 |
many options. Just don't force others to use it as well. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Again we must be afraid of speaking of daemons for fear that daemons |
| 29 |
might swallow us. Finally, this fear has become reasonable. |
Archives