Is it just me, or is there a reason for it?
richardkimber at btinternet.com
Sat Aug 14 15:52:23 UTC 2010
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:57:27 -0500
C de-Avillez wrote:
> Generically speaking my answer would be no. For the udev message: it
> is pointing to a deprecated usage, that has to be adjusted. It is
> important for this type of message to keep on being issued until the
> changes are made.
I'm really surprised that it should be thought that everyone should get a
message in order to keep developers on message.
> Finally, for the 'audit' message -- most definitely stays.
Well, I don't see the point of it. The user has already had an on-screen
error message at the time. All it seems to say is that the user (or
a program) tried to open a file that evince couldn't open, probably because
evince isn't designed to open such files. I can't see how useful an audit
of that could be.
> > or put more effort into creating the
> > necessary regular expressions that will allow logcheck to filter
> > them out.
> This would be something for the logchecker hackers, or users. If it
> is a good change, upstream will accept and include the changes into
> logchecker. You could do it, and propose your changes upstream.
> But, right now, all I can see points to a not-enough-adjusted
> logchecker configuration on your side.
But part of my point is that most users can't, or won't want to master
extended regular expressions.
Political Science Resources
More information about the ubuntu-users