httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From C...@PROCESS.COM (Rodent of Unusual Size)
Subject Re: Aha! The conditional logging beast rears its head again
Date Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 GMT
>From the fingers of Marc Slemko flowed the following:
>
>On Mon, 3 Nov 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:
>
>> Yeah whatever, I'm not going to veto it since you all seem to want it.  I
>> just think that down this path lies feature bloat, and is more of a
>> "windows" philosophy than a unix philosophy.  What if one of our modules
>
>So, do piped logs work reliably on NT?  <g>  You also have to consider
>that the average NT installation does things the Windows way, so the user
>doesn't have a choice of just piping it to grep.  It is either have it
>built into the server, or download twelve zillion little things and try to
>make them work.
>
>I agree that for many things they are better, however many people just
>don't want that.

    Good point (excellent point, actually).  For many things I would
    prefer the RPL interface - but I would like the flexibility of being
    able to *not* log it at all if I felt that was better.  "Give 'em
    rope."  I don't mind if the relevant documentation says RPL is the
    preferred method for performance (although I'm not convinced that it
    wouldn't be a wash, system-wide).

    Okey, I'll dust off and update the patch I had for this.  Shall I
    work it up for 1.2/contrib and a 1.3.1 feature?  Or for 1.2.5 and
    1.3b3?  Or what?

      CustomLog logs/log-if-zed CLF env=ZED
      CustomLog logs/log-ifnot-plugh CLF env=!PLUGH

    Still needs to be voted, but it sounds like they're there (me and
    Marc this go-round, Paul from the earlier one - and it's even Dean's
    syntax! ;-)..

    #ken    P-)}

Mime
View raw message