Re: reversion of access.log commenting out in rootfile

[Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2234 bytes --]

Thank you for confirming this.

> On 13 Aug 2024, at 12:04, Adolf Belka <adolf.belka(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Michael & Arne,
> 
> On 13/08/2024 11:57, Michael Tremer wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I am going to reply on Arne’s behalf...
>>> On 9 Aug 2024, at 16:25, Adolf Belka <adolf.belka(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Arne,
>>> 
>>> I saw that my patch for commenting out the access.log in the rootfile had been reverted.
>>> 
>>> https://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=commit;h=97067db7862450bb40d4e9188627d6b5585bf931
>>> 
>>> I don't understand the meaning of
>>> 
>>> "the file was created to be shipped with permissions
>>> so it is needed in the rootfile."
>> The file is created with other than default ownership than root or maybe other permissions than 644.
> I will need to have a sit-down and think further on understanding this.
> 
> However, I believe it when you say that it causes a problem if it is removed from the rootfile.
>> There is a follow-up commit which should exclude it from being overwritten:
>>   https://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=commitdiff;h=6f83ae4c959045c866c08cc326f36ff645952ae4
> I hadn't seen that commit. Looking at it, that should solve the issue.
>> Can you confirm that this works, too?
> I was able to test this.
> 
> I looked in my Proxy Logs via the WUI for when I ran the CU186 update and the four days before that date my proxy log was empty.
> 
> I then looked in the proxy logs for the days before CU187 was run. I updated CU187 the day before the access logs would have been rotated so nearly a week would have been lost.
> 
> I can confirm that the access.log is fully present for the whole week before CU187 was updated so the commit worked perfectly.
> 
> Regards,
> Adolf.
>>> 
>>> If it has to stay how do we ensure that users don't lose maybe up to a weeks worth of the access.log file if an update is done on the day before access.log would be rotated to access.log.1 .gz
>>> 
>>> Although this has always been the case, it doesn't seem right to overwrite the existing access.log file if squid is updated or have I misunderstood something?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Adolf.
>>> 
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my laptop