J.R. Oldroyd wgrd at opal.com
Tue Mar 17 08:37:17 CET 2020

On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 13:30:17 -0600 "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason at zx2c4.com> wrote:
> Adding direct syslog support might make sense. I'll look into
> integrating those files you sent, though, perhaps it'd be better if
> you submitted those as a patch to the mailing list with a proper
> Signed-off-by line? (Or even to Github?)
Will do.
> I'm curious to know: is there a reason why you prefer this to something like:
> `LOG_LEVEL=debug wireguard-go -f wg0 2>&1 | logger &`
Since adding syslog support is so trivial, given the existing code
is already designed around logging levels and given Go's clean support
of syslog, why not just build it in so that wireguard's logging is done
consistently with all other UNIX daemons?  Piping stdout to logger
is non-standard and also loses the ability to filter the different
log levels to different log destinations.


More information about the WireGuard mailing list