You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to log4j-dev@logging.apache.org by Nicolas Mailhot <Ni...@laposte.net> on 2003/03/25 14:51:31 UTC
Re: [Jpackage-discuss] jms, jmx
Le lun 24/03/2003 à 12:41, Henri Gomez a écrit :
> Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just did jms and jmx for jpp-utils 1.5. Both are non-free, and are
> > installed binary though it looks like they could (should ?) be rebuild
> > in the rpm.
> >
> > And jmx version is now 1.2 in my branch - HEAD is still stuck at 1.1.
>
> For jmx, we should use the mx4j which is OSS....
Unfortunately mx4j requires log4j for building, and log4j's jmx part
requires some stuff in jmxtools that does not seem to be implemented in
mx4j.
So right now we need the real jmx to build mx4j:(
Regards,
(CC-ing relevant lists)
--
Nicolas Mailhot
Re: [Jpackage-discuss] jms, jmx
Posted by Ceki Gülcü <ce...@qos.ch>.
Thanks for letting us know. We will make sure that log4j builds with mx4j.
At 02:51 PM 3/25/2003 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>Le lun 24/03/2003 à 12:41, Henri Gomez a écrit :
> > Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I just did jms and jmx for jpp-utils 1.5. Both are non-free, and are
> > > installed binary though it looks like they could (should ?) be rebuild
> > > in the rpm.
> > >
> > > And jmx version is now 1.2 in my branch - HEAD is still stuck at 1.1.
> >
> > For jmx, we should use the mx4j which is OSS....
>
>Unfortunately mx4j requires log4j for building, and log4j's jmx part
>requires some stuff in jmxtools that does not seem to be implemented in
>mx4j.
>
>So right now we need the real jmx to build mx4j:(
>
>Regards,
>
>(CC-ing relevant lists)
>
>--
>Nicolas Mailhot
--
Ceki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org