Comment 3 for bug 33394

I agree with the logic that syslog-ng is not a supported piece of software, and thus using it instead of sysklogd makes ones system not supported.

However, the current way the dependencies are specified removes all of whatever benefits the 'ubuntu-minimal' package has to anyone who knows syslog-ng well enough to use it (as anyone who knows it that well would certainly use it instead of sysklogd, given a choice of just those two).

Also note that sysklogd and syslog-ng do not actually conflict with each other. In general, it's not a good idea to have both running on the same log data at the same time. However, I have seen a log server that used syslogd for local logging, and syslog-ng for receiving logs from other systems. It worked just fine. (Note: they were not writing to the same log files. Having them write to the same files would have defeated some of the point of the (admittedly, quite silly) purpose. Said purpose was, incidentally, lack of trust for syslog-ng. The company in question changed to running just syslog-ng after about 6 months, having seen how vastly superior syslog-ng is.)

Finally, this is simply a matter of fixing dependencies. It should be a really quick thing to do. Instead, we've had at least four bugs submitted, at least one brainstorm idea, and at least two years have passed since the first bug was filed. This should have taken less than two weeks, including QA and review.