Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 12:14:06 -0500 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Add SOCK_STREAM support for syslog On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 03:07:49PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > * Jan Horstmann <J.Horstmann@...twald.de> [2017-11-10 13:17:31 +0000]: > > some time ago there was a discussion whether musl-libc's syslog should > > support SOCK_STREAM as a fall back if SOCK_DGRAM fails like glibc does > > ( http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2015/08/10/1 ) > > Later on a patch was posted to the mailing list: http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2017/08/21/3 > > Since we depend on this functionality we have applied this patch and are quiet happy with it. > > I would like to know whether there are any plans to incorporate this patch into a future release? > > i think you need to explain why you depend on this > to get consensus on the inclusion of the patch. Is it mutually exclusive whether /dev/log is listening as SOCK_DGRAM or SOCK_STREAM? If not, I think there's a race where connecting to SOCK_DGRAM fails, then syslogd starts listening on both, and the SOCK_STREAM connect succeeds in the fallback despite there being a SOCK_DGRAM service available. Adoption of the patch is mainly blocked on establishing that it does not harm any existing usage. I suspect and seem to remember (but haven't looked at it lately) that SOCK_STREAM has some undesirable properties from a standpoint of logging and that SOCK_DGRAM is what you want if possible. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.