Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:06:17 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: requesting the return of the syslog daemon
Message-ID: <20021219010617.GE18145@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <200212190038 DOT gBJ0csc7027747 AT corbulon DOT video-collage DOT 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/