On 11 May 2018 at 23:53, Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 09:33:15PM +0100, Rowland Penny via
> samba-technical wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 May 2018 13:17:52 -0700
> > Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 09:56:47PM +0200, Timur I. Bakeyev via
samba
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > Fixing it in both ways is easy, but it would be nice to hear
from
> > > > the developers, why did they choose such a limited set of
syslog
> > > > facilities.
> > >
> > > I don't know. The limited set was done a long time ago
> > > (2005) by Deryck (no longer a Team member) in commit
> > > 435295f1840aa8bd4c04f20a2348c6d701c6b7dc so I think
> > > we've lost the institutional memory here.
> > >
> > > How about we fix the code to do what the man page
> > > says ?
> > >
> > > Jeremy.
> >
> > What a good idea and thank you for volunteering ;-)
>
> Oh I walked into that one :-).
>
> OK, what do you need it to do ?
>
Originally topic starter wanted to put the AUTH facility into the config.
It could be that it's the only one, together with DAEMON, that make sense
there. From other side, for completeness it may be feasible to add full set
of:
static const CODE facilitynames[] = {
{ "auth", LOG_AUTH, },
{ "cron", LOG_CRON, },
{ "daemon", LOG_DAEMON, },
{ "ftp", LOG_FTP, },
{ "kern", LOG_KERN, },
{ "lpr", LOG_LPR, },
{ "mail", LOG_MAIL, },
{ "news", LOG_NEWS, },
{ "ntp", LOG_NTP, },
{ "security", LOG_SECURITY, },
{ "syslog", LOG_SYSLOG, },
{ "user", LOG_USER, },
{ "uucp", LOG_UUCP, },
{ "local0", LOG_LOCAL0, },
{ "local1", LOG_LOCAL1, },
{ "local2", LOG_LOCAL2, },
{ "local3", LOG_LOCAL3, },
{ "local4", LOG_LOCAL4, },
{ "local5", LOG_LOCAL5, },
{ "local6", LOG_LOCAL6, },
{ "local7", LOG_LOCAL7, },
{ NULL, -1, }
};
I've explicitly removed LOG_AUTHPRIV from this list.
With regards,
Timur.