Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:06:17 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: requesting the return of the syslog daemon Message-ID: <20021219010617.GE18145@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <200212190038.gBJ0csc7027747@corbulon.video-collage.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200212190038.gBJ0csc7027747@corbulon.video-collage.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 07:38:54PM -0500, Mikhail Teterin wrote: >Although removing the syslogd seems natural, since the syslog(3) send >the info directly to EventLog, it is wrong. We didn't "remove" syslogd. It never existed. Requests sent to the ether for someone to do something for you rarely work. If you want a syslogd, then there is a really simple voting procedure. Provide the source code to implement it. Then people get to evaluate your method and see if it makes sense. If enough people decide that it makes sense, then it becomes part of cygwin. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/