You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Jeff Trawick <tr...@gmail.com> on 2014/12/02 14:08:04 UTC
Re: Systemd support in 2.4
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Jeff Trawick <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Jan Kaluža <jk...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 09/14/2014 01:21 PM, Martynas Bendorius wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Is there any special reason why mod_systemd and mod_journald (available
>>> in trunk) are not backported to 2.4 yet?
>>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think mod_systemd could be proposed for 2.4 branch (maybe even with the
>> changes adding socket activation), but for mod_journald, we would have to
>> backport "modular logging", which breaks the API/ABI and therefore I'm
>> afraid that won't happen in 2.4 branch :(.
>>
>>
> I have an old patch somewhere that doesn't break the API/ABI, and
> accommodates such differences as syslog being built-in in 2.4.x. I didn't
> realize that anybody besides me actually cared.
>
> I'll try to find time to see how it fits in 2.4.x-HEAD.
>
I've simply attached it from its state one year ago, not having time to
play with it. I don't think it is necessary to break the ABI. syslog
support remains part of core logging instead of in a module.
>
>
>
>> Jan Kaluza
>>
>>
>> As we have a lot of distributions already using systemd by default
>>> (CentOS/RHEL 7, Fedora, Arch Linux, CoreOS, openSUSE), and more of them
>>> are going to use systemd by default (Debian 8 (Jessie), Ubuntu), it
>>> requires manual patching of apache for the support of systemd/journald.
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
http://emptyhammock.com/
Re: Systemd support in 2.4
Posted by Jan Kaluža <jk...@redhat.com>.
On 12/06/2014 01:40 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 6:59 AM, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com
> <ma...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> On 12/02/2014 02:08 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>
> <mailto:trawick@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Jan Kaluža
> <jkaluza@redhat.com <ma...@redhat.com>
> <mailto:jkaluza@redhat.com <ma...@redhat.com>>> wrote:
>
> On 09/14/2014 01:21 PM, Martynas Bendorius wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Is there any special reason why mod_systemd and
> mod_journald
> (available
> in trunk) are not backported to 2.4 yet?
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I think mod_systemd could be proposed for 2.4 branch
> (maybe even
> with the changes adding socket activation), but for
> mod_journald, we would have to backport "modular
> logging", which
> breaks the API/ABI and therefore I'm afraid that won't
> happen in
> 2.4 branch :(.
>
>
> I have an old patch somewhere that doesn't break the
> API/ABI, and
> accommodates such differences as syslog being built-in in
> 2.4.x. I
> didn't realize that anybody besides me actually cared.
>
> I'll try to find time to see how it fits in 2.4.x-HEAD.
>
>
> I've simply attached it from its state one year ago, not having
> time to
> play with it. I don't think it is necessary to break the ABI.
> syslog
> support remains part of core logging instead of in a module.
>
>
> I've created my version of the patch based on yours. It includes
> also more recent commits from trunk related to errorlog providers.
> Can you try it? I presume you have done that backport, because you
> are running that somewhere :).
>
>
> Once upon a time... What remains in my possession is a test module I
> wrote for testing the interface (attached).
>
> Anyway, is this feature from ap_errorlog_provider lost intentionally?
>
> + /** Checks syntax of ErrorLog directive argument.
> + * @param cmd The config directive
> + * @param arg ErrorLog directive argument (or the empty string if
> + * no argument was provided)
> + * @return Error message or NULL on success
> + * @remark The argument will be stored in the error_fname field
> + * of server_rec for access later.
> + */
> + const char * (*parse_errorlog_arg)(cmd_parms *cmd, const char *arg);
>
> (and code to call it in set_errorlog)
>
Thanks, I've missed that one when backporting. I've also checked that
now my patch is the same as yours :).
Regards,
Jan Kaluza
>
> Regards,
> Jan Kaluza
>
>
> Jan Kaluza
>
>
> As we have a lot of distributions already using
> systemd by
> default
> (CentOS/RHEL 7, Fedora, Arch Linux, CoreOS,
> openSUSE), and
> more of them
> are going to use systemd by default (Debian 8 (Jessie),
> Ubuntu), it
> requires manual patching of apache for the support of
> systemd/journald.
>
> Thank you!
>
>
>
>
> --
> Born in Roswell... married an alien...
> http://emptyhammock.com/
>
Re: Systemd support in 2.4
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 6:59 AM, Jan Kaluža <jk...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 12/02/2014 02:08 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com
>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com
>> <ma...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On 09/14/2014 01:21 PM, Martynas Bendorius wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Is there any special reason why mod_systemd and mod_journald
>> (available
>> in trunk) are not backported to 2.4 yet?
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think mod_systemd could be proposed for 2.4 branch (maybe even
>> with the changes adding socket activation), but for
>> mod_journald, we would have to backport "modular logging", which
>> breaks the API/ABI and therefore I'm afraid that won't happen in
>> 2.4 branch :(.
>>
>>
>> I have an old patch somewhere that doesn't break the API/ABI, and
>> accommodates such differences as syslog being built-in in 2.4.x. I
>> didn't realize that anybody besides me actually cared.
>>
>> I'll try to find time to see how it fits in 2.4.x-HEAD.
>>
>>
>> I've simply attached it from its state one year ago, not having time to
>> play with it. I don't think it is necessary to break the ABI. syslog
>> support remains part of core logging instead of in a module.
>>
>
> I've created my version of the patch based on yours. It includes also more
> recent commits from trunk related to errorlog providers. Can you try it? I
> presume you have done that backport, because you are running that somewhere
> :).
>
Once upon a time... What remains in my possession is a test module I wrote
for testing the interface (attached).
Anyway, is this feature from ap_errorlog_provider lost intentionally?
+ /** Checks syntax of ErrorLog directive argument.
+ * @param cmd The config directive
+ * @param arg ErrorLog directive argument (or the empty string if
+ * no argument was provided)
+ * @return Error message or NULL on success
+ * @remark The argument will be stored in the error_fname field
+ * of server_rec for access later.
+ */
+ const char * (*parse_errorlog_arg)(cmd_parms *cmd, const char *arg);
(and code to call it in set_errorlog)
> Regards,
> Jan Kaluza
>
>
> Jan Kaluza
>>
>>
>> As we have a lot of distributions already using systemd by
>> default
>> (CentOS/RHEL 7, Fedora, Arch Linux, CoreOS, openSUSE), and
>> more of them
>> are going to use systemd by default (Debian 8 (Jessie),
>> Ubuntu), it
>> requires manual patching of apache for the support of
>> systemd/journald.
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>>
--
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
http://emptyhammock.com/
Re: Systemd support in 2.4
Posted by Jan Kaluža <jk...@redhat.com>.
On 12/02/2014 02:08 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com
> <ma...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> On 09/14/2014 01:21 PM, Martynas Bendorius wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Is there any special reason why mod_systemd and mod_journald
> (available
> in trunk) are not backported to 2.4 yet?
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I think mod_systemd could be proposed for 2.4 branch (maybe even
> with the changes adding socket activation), but for
> mod_journald, we would have to backport "modular logging", which
> breaks the API/ABI and therefore I'm afraid that won't happen in
> 2.4 branch :(.
>
>
> I have an old patch somewhere that doesn't break the API/ABI, and
> accommodates such differences as syslog being built-in in 2.4.x. I
> didn't realize that anybody besides me actually cared.
>
> I'll try to find time to see how it fits in 2.4.x-HEAD.
>
>
> I've simply attached it from its state one year ago, not having time to
> play with it. I don't think it is necessary to break the ABI. syslog
> support remains part of core logging instead of in a module.
I've created my version of the patch based on yours. It includes also
more recent commits from trunk related to errorlog providers. Can you
try it? I presume you have done that backport, because you are running
that somewhere :).
Regards,
Jan Kaluza
> Jan Kaluza
>
>
> As we have a lot of distributions already using systemd by
> default
> (CentOS/RHEL 7, Fedora, Arch Linux, CoreOS, openSUSE), and
> more of them
> are going to use systemd by default (Debian 8 (Jessie),
> Ubuntu), it
> requires manual patching of apache for the support of
> systemd/journald.
>
> Thank you!
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Born in Roswell... married an alien...
> http://emptyhammock.com/
>