Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=185085
Tony Breeds <tony(a)bakeyournoodle.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |tony(a)bakeyournoodle.com
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=324271
Edwin ten Brink <edwin(a)tenbrink-bekkers.nl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL| |http://subversion.tigris.or
| |g/issue-tracker.html
Version|9 |11
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=324271
Edwin ten Brink <edwin(a)tenbrink-bekkers.nl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #220681|0 |1
is obsolete| |
--- Comment #8 from Edwin ten Brink <edwin(a)tenbrink-bekkers.nl> 2009-06-14 16:23:15 EDT ---
Created an attachment (id=347854)
--> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=347854)
Updated /etc/httpd/conf.d/subversion.conf replacement
Still present in F-11. Upstream (1.6.2) is still not updated.
I have integrated the comments in the originally posted replacement
/etc/httpd/conf.d/subversion.conf. This file should go into the source location
/subversion-{version}/packages/rpm/redhat-8+/subversion.conf (see attachment).
Since this file is specific to rpm (Fedora) based packages, I find it hard to
believe that this excellently documented file has not yet made it into the
upstream source, if not as a Fedora-specific patch. Setting up subversion for
the first time really is a complex process especially with SELinux on, so our
users deserve this piece of documentation.
Getting this patch accepted upstream is no task the reporter should be
requested to do since it involves more than just filing the bug; this is really
a task for the package maintainer.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=136141
--- Comment #30 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt(a)gmail.com> 2009-06-14 12:42:03 EDT ---
What else can I do to avoid that we don't talk past eachother, please?
> rsyslog does not discard selectors silently. First of all, it logs them,
It does _not_ log them. At least not in the example I offer in this ticket.
Yes, it's bad luck that an entire rule gets disabled, see comment 14, please.
> It does not make sense to include a facility to output
> to stderr if nobody will ever see stderr.
What sort of messages do you refer to?
If I log in to a machine and run "sudo /sbin/service rsyslog restart", why
would I not see warnings/errors printed to stderr?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=136141
--- Comment #29 from Rainer Gerhards <rgerhards(a)hq.adiscon.com> 2009-06-14 12:14:59 EDT ---
That's at the core of my question: what is "everything possible" - and how to
configure what it should do? And should it do this always, or needs it be
configurable?
And in regard to comment 27: rsyslog does not discard selectors silently. First
of all, it logs them, so whatever action you have configured (provided you did
it right), you will see them on. That was the primary method of configuring
things so that an admin gets the notifications it wants.
Also, messages are intended to be printed on stderr, but there was a bug which
caused them to be not printed if rsyslogd was backgrounded. Based on the
feedback, I am now tempted to change it that way that even then messages are
printed. However, to do so I would like to hear how these stderr messages be
retrieved. It does not make sense to include a facility to output to stderr if
nobody will ever see stderr. So far, there was no convincing argument that it
would help. Please note that I am overlooking something trivial, but if so,
please educate me...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=136141
--- Comment #28 from Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)mattdm.org> 2009-06-14 09:21:24 EDT ---
I'm of the opinion that it should do everything possible to alert the admin to
a problem. Printing warnings to standard error may not be sufficient, but I
think it's an important element.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=136141
--- Comment #27 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt(a)gmail.com> 2009-06-14 08:07:36 EDT ---
Can't you reuse the same parser that is used for the -N check?
| rsyslogd: unknown priority name "info:mail.none" [try
http://www.rsyslog.com/e/3000 ]
| rsyslogd: the last error occured in /etc/rsyslog.conf, line 39
| rsyslogd: warning: selector line without actions will be discarded
Why doesn't rsyslog print the same warnings when running without option -N? Why
does it discard selectors silently instead?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=136141
--- Comment #26 from Rainer Gerhards <rgerhards(a)hq.adiscon.com> 2009-06-14 05:54:34 EDT ---
OK, so everything you need is to have the messages printed to stderr. But how
do you notice there are some messages? This is unclear to me...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=136141
--- Comment #25 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt(a)gmail.com> 2009-06-14 05:45:08 EDT ---
Whom is that question directed at? I've answered multiple times before that *I*
would prefer to learn about syntax errors on stderr always, e.g. in comment 16.
Unfortunately, it seems I'm the only one who considers (and considered) the
other behaviour as broken. When I originally learnt about this and reported
this in 2004 (!) about syslogd (prior to syslog-ng and rsyslog), I was in good
hope that I would meet interest in fixing it for Fedora and derived
distributions.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.