CentOS - May 2016 - yum update (first in a long time) - /var/log/dovecot no longer used

On Thursday 05 May 2016 15:19:47 John Hodrien wrote:
>
> I'd take a stab at:
>
> journalctl -fu dovecot
>
> The full RHEL7 System Administrators Guide is well worth a read, but
here's
> the bit you're probably after.
>
> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/ht
>ml/System_Administrators_Guide/s1-Using_the_Journal.html
>
> Or maybe:
>
> https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-use-journalctl-to-v
>iew-and-manipulate-systemd-logs
>
> jh
Thanks John.  Another example of systemd project creep - AKA systemd's plan 
for world domination

On Thu, May 5, 2016 9:58 am, Gary Stainburn wrote:
> On Thursday 05 May 2016 15:19:47 John Hodrien wrote:
>> I'd take a stab at:
>> journalctl -fu dovecot
>> The full RHEL7 System Administrators Guide is well worth a read, but
here's
>> the bit you're probably after.
>>
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/ht
>>ml/System_Administrators_Guide/s1-Using_the_Journal.html
>> Or maybe:
>>
https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-use-journalctl-to-v
>>iew-and-manipulate-systemd-logs
>> jh
>
> Thanks John.  Another example of systemd project creep - AKA systemd's
plan
> for world domination
There were several heated discussions on this list, and elsewhere. This is
not intended to start the new one, but to help someone who missed them to
define their statute.

People split into two groups:

Opponents of systemd (, firewqalld, etc.) who argue that from formerly
Unix-like system Linux becomes Unix-unlike (or more MS Windows-like), and
this is bad.

Proponents of systemd etc. who argue that the life goes on, systems evolve
and you better keep up with changes.

Therefore, for new person who is about to, let's say, upgrade Linux system
to the version with systemd, there is a decision that will define that
person's future maintenance of this new system. And the decision has to be
made before upgrade. Luckily for those who do decide to go with systemd,
bugs (that always are present in new software) are being solved. Luckily
for those who do not accept fundamental changes systemd brings (like
binary logs or config files infested with XML garbage - sorry if I'm
missing or misinterpreting something) there are Unix system one can
migrate machine to.

Either way one has to read and estimate what making that step (upgrading
to systemd, firewalld based Linux or switching to some flavor of Unix)
will entail in a long run for that server and the server admin. Either
way, as in one of Unix handbooks they stress: read carefully the upgrade
notes!

I hope, this helps someone.

Valeri

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On Thursday 05 May 2016 17:16:17 Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> There were several heated discussions on this list, and elsewhere. This is
> not intended to start the new one, but to help someone who missed them to
> define their statute.
>
> People split into two groups:
>
> Opponents of systemd (, firewqalld, etc.) who argue that from formerly
> Unix-like system Linux becomes Unix-unlike (or more MS Windows-like), and
> this is bad.
>
> Proponents of systemd etc. who argue that the life goes on, systems evolve
> and you better keep up with changes.
>
> Therefore, for new person who is about to, let's say, upgrade Linux
system
> to the version with systemd, there is a decision that will define that
> person's future maintenance of this new system. And the decision has to
be
> made before upgrade. Luckily for those who do decide to go with systemd,
> bugs (that always are present in new software) are being solved. Luckily
> for those who do not accept fundamental changes systemd brings (like
> binary logs or config files infested with XML garbage - sorry if I'm
> missing or misinterpreting something) there are Unix system one can
> migrate machine to.
>
> Either way one has to read and estimate what making that step (upgrading
> to systemd, firewalld based Linux or switching to some flavor of Unix)
> will entail in a long run for that server and the server admin. Either
> way, as in one of Unix handbooks they stress: read carefully the upgrade
> notes!
>
> I hope, this helps someone.
>
> Valeri
>
I understand the arguments for the move to systemd - and I also understand the 
points of those arguments.  Like most arguments, there are some valid and 
positive points and some not so.

There are times - such as the encompassing of the name resolver code - where 
it just seems a case of replacing old, mature code with new untested code for 
no reason.

Either way, I now have to manage both traditional and systemd based systems. 
Okay, it just means learning new toolsets, but it's something else I have to
learn, and something else I have to cope with for my bespoke systems and 
services.

What I didn't expect, and what really threw me was that this has been 
implemented via a simply 'yum update' of an existing system, not at a
major
release level.