On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 09:38 +0100, Fekete Robert wrote:
Update from Bazsi: changing the type of the block to root should workaround the problem.
Yes, that's what I said when I stumbled into Robert on the corridor. But now as I see the use-case, I can say that there's no "log" context for blocks right now. Hmm.. here's a proof-of-concept patch to introduce block support in log statement. It is not perfect as the ';' has to match exactly (e.g. you need to skip the ';' in the block, all the others ignore multiple semicolons now) This is as far as I could get it within 5 minutes, and I'd appreciate if you could improve it. Thanks.
Robert
Fekete Robert wrote:
Eric Berggren wrote:
Howdy
Looking to use the new fancy "block" construct in syslog-ng 3.2.1 (OSE) -- (the example in the documentation [5.3.2] doesn't parse, but figured out needs to include ()'s as well in the block definition).
Hi,
thanks for noticing this error. I've corrected it in the source repo of the adminguide, and will update the docs on the website when someone tells me if using {} within blocks is permitted (but now buggy) or forbidden.
Regards,
Robert
Meanwhile, trying to define a "log" block, that contains other log {} stanza's, but fails to parse:
filter f_zort { level(err); }; destination d_weblog_unknown { file("/tmp/foo"); };
block log bl_weblog() { filter(f_zort); log { destination(d_weblog_unknown); }; };
Error parsing main, syntax error, unexpected '}', expecting $end in /usr/local/etc/syslog-ng.d/10-weblog at line 7, column 1: included from /etc/syslog-ng.conf line 15, column 37
>> }; <<
The idea being I would include this within another "log { }" stanza in the main file.
If I remove "log { destination(...); };" from the "bl_weblog()" block, it parses okay. I have another ("destination") block within the config that also parses okay (even parameterized). Strangely, commenting out the entry with a "#" at the start of that line still results in a syntax error. The error is independent of whether bl_weblog() is even referenced anywhere.
The main config may include only 'include "10-weblog"' and nothing else to demonstrate.
Seems otherwise a valid scenario, no ?
thanks, -eric
______________________________________________________________________________ Member info: https://lists.balabit.hu/mailman/listinfo/syslog-ng Documentation: http://www.balabit.com/support/documentation/?product=syslog-ng FAQ: http://www.campin.net/syslog-ng/faq.html
______________________________________________________________________________ Member info: https://lists.balabit.hu/mailman/listinfo/syslog-ng Documentation: http://www.balabit.com/support/documentation/?product=syslog-ng FAQ: http://www.campin.net/syslog-ng/faq.html
______________________________________________________________________________ Member info: https://lists.balabit.hu/mailman/listinfo/syslog-ng Documentation: http://www.balabit.com/support/documentation/?product=syslog-ng FAQ: http://www.campin.net/syslog-ng/faq.html
-- Bazsi