From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from feline.systems ([99.23.220.214]) by ur; Wed Feb 10 15:24:41 EST 2016
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:24:34 -0500
From: BurnZeZ@feline.systems
To: 9front@9front.org
Subject: Re: [9front] syslog(2) change
Message-ID: <8145f2ab941ed6e33626187aa0b4ba56@utsuho.znet>
In-Reply-To: <20160210160612.GA1282@wopr.sciops.net>
References: <1270b9585a3e327733049d87e8a08103@utsuho.znet>
	<D5041DCA-9744-4636-AEDE-68F4A104EB5F@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp>
	<50a1e90923c69e7c710766ab431c23a8@utsuho.znet>
	<20160210160612.GA1282@wopr.sciops.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
List-ID: <9front.9front.org>
List-Help: <http://lists.9front.org>
X-Glyph: ➈
X-Bullshit: overflow-preventing RESTful just-in-time full-stack backend 

> I also don't know why you want to play three-card-monte with the
> ordering of the information; the hostname needs to stay first.  This
> makes tools like xcat's xcoll much easier to port and maintain.

If the order is significant in some way, it doesn't need to be
changed.  I meant to say this in my first mail (I had to rewrite that
mail after a surgical mb2→paste destroyed it).  The only reason reason
I placed the timestamp first was so that timestamps would be aligned
when you're skimming through the logs.