Thread

Re: [HACKERS] Re: syslog logging setup broken?

Nic Ferrier <nferrier@tapsellferrier.co.uk> — 2001-02-04T22:37:12Z

>>> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> 04-Feb-01 10:07:40 PM >>>

>> The bottom line is that, IMHO, writing a portable 
>> init.d style (or any other such concept) startup file 
>> that is ready for blind use is beyond practicality.  
>> It might be better to collect a few of the ones that are
>> being used now (Red Hat-style, SuSE-style, Debian, 
>> *BSD-style) and ship them.  This should be coordinated 
>>with the packagers, though. 

>Should I remove init.d from /contrib?

I'm just a postgres user but I don't agree with Peter. I think the
file is valuable.

The file is valuable for people not using a distribution such as
Debian, etc... and also is usefull to people developing packages for
distributions.

I don't use a packaged postgres and it was certainly valuable to me
because it served as an example of what I had to do to get postgres
going quickly in the way that I wanted.

I sent Peter an updated file that IMHO irons out some problems which
may cause Peter to consider the file broken:

- ouptut was being piped to the logger if "syslog" was on
It's not necessary to do that because postgres handles the decision
about syslog depending on the conf file.

- the postmaster was being started without nohup

- the system for setting options wasn't very usefull
the system that I've replaced it with isn't terribly usefull either
but it works.


So anyway, my view as a user is that it's usefull and that a package
specific version would come with the package anyway.


Nic Ferrier
Tapsell-Ferrier Limited