also sprach Thilo Uttendorfer <deb...@uttendorfer.net> [2012.04.30.1513 +0200]: > Although it probably could replace logcheck, I would not recommend > it to use it that way because the syntax is much more complex.
I don't quite understand. Are you telling me that I will not be able to properly configure logsurfer (even if it is more complex) and then purge logcheck and have at least the same service available? Can logsurfer only execute an action when a filter (?) matches? The nice thing about logcheck was that it always fired except if an exception matched, which is the proper way to do it! -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> Related projects: : :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck http://vcs-pkg.org `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems "gott ist tot! und wir haben ihn getötet." - friedrich nietzsche
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)
