Ask Different is a question and answer site for power users of Apple hardware and software. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

What exactly is the difference between using logger and syslog -s? According to its manpage, logger provides interface to the system log module, but I can't really see the point given that syslog(1) seems to be just that, only much more powerful.

Is it just a matter of simplicity or am I missing something? And which one would you recommend for simple scripting?

share|improve this question
up vote 0 down vote accepted

syslog is more powerful than logger which also means that logger is easier to use for simple purposes. The man page indicates as much:

man logger -> Logger provides a shell command interface to the syslog(3) system log module

The main advantage of syslog -s for simple logging is sending log lines to a different computer to have it logged there. For simple shell scripting that's probably not needed.

share|improve this answer
Thanks for the clarification! Seems like it's more or less what I expected. However, as you can notice, the manpage you're citing mentions syslog(3) (the system log module), rather than syslog(1) (the command). In fact, syslog(1) isn't referred to at all in the whole logger manpage, even though it seems to provide "a shell command interface to the syslog(3) system log module" just as well. I found it a bit confusing and hence my question! – u.n.owen Sep 22 '12 at 22:13
(1) and (3) are chapter numbers in the man pages. 1 is commands, 3 is library calls. The facility itself is just syslog. – patrix Sep 22 '12 at 22:23

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.