On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 15:38 +0000, Bryan Henderson wrote:
I think logging to a pipe is even more likely to fail (and thereby generate a logging loop) than logging to a file, which I already know is too risky. Avoiding loops is much more important than preserving the messages, so I will probably either stop logging of the "internal" source altogether, or route the messages to a "user" destination (i.e. write to a logged-in terminal). The "user" destination seems to be really simple and highly robust.
But I might be able to do better with a small enhancement to the code. I'm thinking of something that drops any message generated internally while in the process of logging a message from source 'internal'.
That's a good idea. I'll look into implementing this. -- Bazsi