Logcheck devel - Mar 2006 - Bug#355949: run-parts vs. find

The changelog for version 1.2.43 says the reason for switching to
'find' from 'run-parts':

   * Use 'find' instead of 'run-parts' to list the contents of
     directories since 'run-parts' cannot handle filenames with periods.
     Update control to depend on findutils.

It seems like not processing rule files with dots in them would be a
feaure, not a bug. Reverting back to run-parts would fix bugs 355383
and 353793 as well as this one. The only stipulation would be not being
able to use dots (or some other characters) in rule files you want to
use, but some sites depend on rule files with those characters to not
be processed. Can't logcheck just go back to using run-parts?

On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 02:23:45PM -0500, Andrew Deason
wrote:
>    * Use 'find' instead of 'run-parts' to list the contents
of
>      directories since 'run-parts' cannot handle filenames with
periods.
> It seems like not processing rule files with dots in them would be a
> feaure, not a bug. Reverting back to run-parts would fix bugs 355383
> and 353793 as well as this one. The only stipulation would be not being
I second this. The Debian-way to process config-directories is
implemented in run-parts. Usually people depend on this way if
they disable some specific files in these directories (they mv them to
file.disabled or file~ or something like that). This way also respects
editors saving backups of modified files. The Debian package manager
also depends on this way when it stores .dpkg-something files there.
I myself, for example, always keep the original version of a changed
conffile as file.orig in the same place.

So using find instead of run-parts worsens a lot of things at the
dubious benefit of accepting filenames with periods.


just my 2 cents, Thanks for your work & regards
   Mario
-- 
Independence Day: Fortunately, the alien computer operating system works just
fine with the laptop. This proves an important point which Apple enthusiasts
have known for years. While the evil empire of Microsoft may dominate the
computers of Earth people, more advanced life forms clearly prefer Mac's.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 483 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url :
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/logcheck-devel/attachments/20060327/49b02570/attachment.pgp

Hi Andrew,

On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 02:23:45PM -0500, Andrew Deason
wrote:
> The changelog for version 1.2.43 says the reason for switching to
> 'find' from 'run-parts':
> 
>    * Use 'find' instead of 'run-parts' to list the contents
of
>      directories since 'run-parts' cannot handle filenames with
periods.
>      Update control to depend on findutils.
> 
> It seems like not processing rule files with dots in them would be a
> feaure, not a bug. Reverting back to run-parts would fix bugs 355383
> and 353793 as well as this one. The only stipulation would be not being
> able to use dots (or some other characters) in rule files you want to
> use, but some sites depend on rule files with those characters to not
> be processed. Can't logcheck just go back to using run-parts?
Some sites depend on rules with periods, and that's what brought on this
change.  A user was confused when a file named like.so was not read.

I'm inclined to believe that leaving scraps in the etc tree is sloppy
administration, and the .disabled stuff is a horrid kluge.

It seems that there are a bunch of users depending on the old functionality,
so I'm going to support run-parts anyway.  It will also need to be
documented
that rule file names  can only contain letters, numbers, underscores, and
hyphens.

-- 
Todd Troxell
http://rapidpacket.com/~xtat