> I'd be unsurprised if rsyslog has done datagrams for a while.
> omuxsock, the rsyslog log sender module, only does datagrams so I'd be
> surprised if imuxsock didn't handle them natively. Hell, they might
> have been always sending datagrams but not removing the stream markers
> until recently.
Yup, that's it.
Oh, it's a mess. A huge mess; there doesn't seem to be any authority
on the details of the syslog protocol. No normative body, the client
is in the libc, the server is an application: a definite recipe for
success!
I've asked on the musl-libc list what they know about it. musl syslog()
only uses datagrams, and actually fails to send anything to syslogd
when a stream server is listening. It worked with glibc and uClibc -
did those attempt connecting to a stream if the datagram failed ? >.>
Waiting for an answer from the musl people. Oh, how I hate those
situations. The right thing is obviously never to use syslog(), but
it's so hard to get that through thick skulls used to decades of poor
Unix history.
--
Laurent
Received on Mon Aug 10 2015 - 21:15:48 UTC