You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com> on 2013/05/17 13:18:44 UTC
SLF4J Binding Warnings
Hi
I noticed lucene/replicator tests output this warning:
[junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Failed to load class
"org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder".
[junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Defaulting to no-operation (NOP) logger
implementation
[junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: See
http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#StaticLoggerBinder for further details.
In the webpage mentioned in the warning it's said that's because the
classpath doesn't have one of slf4j bindings, e.g. slf4j-jdk. Replicator
itself doesn't use logger at all, but InfoStream, so this must be something
that comes from the Jetty libs.
Is it a new thing? Do Solr tests output same warnings? Should we care about
it?
What's weird is that this is printed only when I run w/
-Dtestscase=HttpReplicatorTest, but not if I run 'ant test'. Maybe that's
related to the debug info test-framework outputs if a single test is run vs
all?
Shai
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com>.
I don't care what they say: of course as a producer of logging jars they
would encourage their use! There is a clear bias here! Meanwhile I just
laugh when software has like five or six jars yet prints don't work.
On May 26, 2013 11:14 PM, "David Smiley (@MITRE.org)" <DS...@mitre.org>
wrote:
> Interesting. But the sysout-over-slf4j project declares:
>
>
> > The sysout-over-slf4j module is explicitly not intended to encourage the
> > use of System.out or System.err for logging purposes. There is a
> > significant performance overhead attached to its use, and as such it
> > should be considered a stop-gap for your own code until you can alter it
> > to use SLF4J directly, or a work-around for poorly behaving third party
> > modules.
>
> As far as Solr is concerned, SLF4J is good, IMO. Adapters are available to
> log to basically anything, and the user is in control of that by providing
> their logging jar of choice.
>
> ~ David
>
>
> Robert Muir wrote
> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Shawn Heisey <
>
> > solr@
>
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> For logs that are in test code itself, using sysout or syserr is
> probably
> >> a good option. The Solr code that is being tested will (in most cases)
> >> pull in a dependency on slf4j because Logger is ubiquitous. That's what
> >> I
> >> was referring to.
> >>
> >>
> > I'm not sure it has to forever. For example, in trunk we could decide to
> > use jetty's logging class instead, so solr has no hard dependency on
> slf4j
> > at all.
> > If its in the classpath it would get used, but otherwise stuff just goes
> > to
> > System.err.println.
> >
> > Or solr could just use System.err.println, and if someone wants logging
> > they can redirect it (e.g.
> > http://projects.lidalia.org.uk/sysout-over-slf4j/
> > ).
> >
> > Lots of possibilities to remove logging jars!
>
>
>
>
>
> -----
> Author:
> http://www.packtpub.com/apache-solr-3-enterprise-search-server/book
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SLF4J-Binding-Warnings-tp4064166p4066182.html
> Sent from the Lucene - Java Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by "David Smiley (@MITRE.org)" <DS...@mitre.org>.
Interesting. But the sysout-over-slf4j project declares:
> The sysout-over-slf4j module is explicitly not intended to encourage the
> use of System.out or System.err for logging purposes. There is a
> significant performance overhead attached to its use, and as such it
> should be considered a stop-gap for your own code until you can alter it
> to use SLF4J directly, or a work-around for poorly behaving third party
> modules.
As far as Solr is concerned, SLF4J is good, IMO. Adapters are available to
log to basically anything, and the user is in control of that by providing
their logging jar of choice.
~ David
Robert Muir wrote
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Shawn Heisey <
> solr@
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> For logs that are in test code itself, using sysout or syserr is probably
>> a good option. The Solr code that is being tested will (in most cases)
>> pull in a dependency on slf4j because Logger is ubiquitous. That's what
>> I
>> was referring to.
>>
>>
> I'm not sure it has to forever. For example, in trunk we could decide to
> use jetty's logging class instead, so solr has no hard dependency on slf4j
> at all.
> If its in the classpath it would get used, but otherwise stuff just goes
> to
> System.err.println.
>
> Or solr could just use System.err.println, and if someone wants logging
> they can redirect it (e.g.
> http://projects.lidalia.org.uk/sysout-over-slf4j/
> ).
>
> Lots of possibilities to remove logging jars!
-----
Author: http://www.packtpub.com/apache-solr-3-enterprise-search-server/book
--
View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SLF4J-Binding-Warnings-tp4064166p4066182.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Shawn Heisey <so...@elyograg.org> wrote:
>
> For logs that are in test code itself, using sysout or syserr is probably
> a good option. The Solr code that is being tested will (in most cases)
> pull in a dependency on slf4j because Logger is ubiquitous. That's what I
> was referring to.
>
>
I'm not sure it has to forever. For example, in trunk we could decide to
use jetty's logging class instead, so solr has no hard dependency on slf4j
at all.
If its in the classpath it would get used, but otherwise stuff just goes to
System.err.println.
Or solr could just use System.err.println, and if someone wants logging
they can redirect it (e.g. http://projects.lidalia.org.uk/sysout-over-slf4j/
).
Lots of possibilities to remove logging jars!
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Shawn Heisey <so...@elyograg.org>.
On 5/23/2013 9:21 AM, Robert Muir wrote:
> It does not make sense even for solr tests, why wouldnt tests just use
> System.err.println?
>
> Why make things complicated?
For logs that are in test code itself, using sysout or syserr is
probably a good option. The Solr code that is being tested will (in
most cases) pull in a dependency on slf4j because Logger is ubiquitous.
That's what I was referring to.
Thanks,
Shawn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Shawn Heisey <so...@elyograg.org> wrote:
> On 5/22/2013 8:38 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
> > I looked at this: i dont think this module should rely upon slf4j.
>
> Just for clarity sake: You are only advocating that the slf4j be removed
> from this particular test, right? Lucene (including its tests) should
> have only logging dependencies that cannot be avoided. In this case,
> the slf4j dependency can be avoided.
>
> I'm ask this clarification question because I don't think we want to
> have anyone trying to actively remove slf4j dependencies from Solr
> tests. Solr uses slf4j extensively, but as an actual server product
> rather than a development API, this makes sense.
>
>
It does not make sense even for solr tests, why wouldnt tests just use
System.err.println?
Why make things complicated?
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Shawn Heisey <so...@elyograg.org>.
On 5/22/2013 8:38 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
> I looked at this: i dont think this module should rely upon slf4j.
Just for clarity sake: You are only advocating that the slf4j be removed
from this particular test, right? Lucene (including its tests) should
have only logging dependencies that cannot be avoided. In this case,
the slf4j dependency can be avoided.
I'm ask this clarification question because I don't think we want to
have anyone trying to actively remove slf4j dependencies from Solr
tests. Solr uses slf4j extensively, but as an actual server product
rather than a development API, this makes sense.
Thanks,
Shawn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com>.
Ok so I'm fine w/ removing slf4j.
Shai
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes: as i said it makes the test log correctly. we can set a sysprop
> before/after to crank the level to DEBUG as well.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Rob, personally I don't mind if SLF4J goes out ... the whole jetty
>> dependencies is required only for testing at the moment.
>> The question is, if you take it out, will we still be able to debug
>> what's going on during tests on the Jetty side?
>> Will Jetty dump everything it has to syserr if SLF4J is not present?
>>
>> Shai
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:38 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I looked at this: i dont think this module should rely upon slf4j.
>>>
>>> Remember all this jetty stuff, is just for running this test.
>>> Jetty doesnt need slf4j (it just goes to system.err.println by default
>>> if slf4j isnt there), so slf4j is only making things worse.
>>> the only thing here that needs logging jars is the httpclient, and
>>> because of that unfortunately commons-logging is needed.
>>>
>>> Fixing these dependencies makes the test log correctly. Still, bringing
>>> in all this jetty etc is a really heavy-duty way to test. It would be
>>> better to test this module without dragging in so many third party
>>> dependencies.
>>>
>>> Index: ivy.xml
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- ivy.xml (revision 1485538)
>>> +++ ivy.xml (working copy)
>>> @@ -39,8 +39,7 @@
>>> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-io"
>>> rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
>>> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-continuation"
>>> rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
>>> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-http"
>>> rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
>>> - <dependency org="org.slf4j" name="slf4j-api" rev="1.6.6"
>>> transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
>>> - <dependency org="org.slf4j" name="jcl-over-slf4j" rev="1.6.6"
>>> transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
>>> + <dependency org="commons-logging" name="commons-logging"
>>> rev="1.1.3" transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
>>> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty.orbit" name="javax.servlet"
>>> rev="3.0.0.v201112011016" transitive="false" conf="servlet->default">
>>> <artifact name="javax.servlet" type="orbit" ext="jar"/>
>>> </dependency>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Michael McCandless <
>>> lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think we should do this, so we can debug why HttpReplicatorTest
>>>> keeps failing on OS X / Java 1.6: maybe something is happening and the
>>>> logs will give a clue ...
>>>>
>>>> Mike McCandless
>>>>
>>>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > put a log4j.properties as a resource or beside the test in svn.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> Hi
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I noticed lucene/replicator tests output this warning:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Failed to load class
>>>> >> "org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder".
>>>> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Defaulting to no-operation (NOP) logger
>>>> >> implementation
>>>> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: See
>>>> >> http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#StaticLoggerBinder for further
>>>> details.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> In the webpage mentioned in the warning it's said that's because the
>>>> >> classpath doesn't have one of slf4j bindings, e.g. slf4j-jdk.
>>>> Replicator
>>>> >> itself doesn't use logger at all, but InfoStream, so this must be
>>>> something
>>>> >> that comes from the Jetty libs.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Is it a new thing? Do Solr tests output same warnings? Should we
>>>> care about
>>>> >> it?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> What's weird is that this is printed only when I run w/
>>>> >> -Dtestscase=HttpReplicatorTest, but not if I run 'ant test'. Maybe
>>>> that's
>>>> >> related to the debug info test-framework outputs if a single test is
>>>> run vs
>>>> >> all?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Shai
>>>> >
>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com>.
Yes: as i said it makes the test log correctly. we can set a sysprop
before/after to crank the level to DEBUG as well.
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rob, personally I don't mind if SLF4J goes out ... the whole jetty
> dependencies is required only for testing at the moment.
> The question is, if you take it out, will we still be able to debug what's
> going on during tests on the Jetty side?
> Will Jetty dump everything it has to syserr if SLF4J is not present?
>
> Shai
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:38 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I looked at this: i dont think this module should rely upon slf4j.
>>
>> Remember all this jetty stuff, is just for running this test.
>> Jetty doesnt need slf4j (it just goes to system.err.println by default if
>> slf4j isnt there), so slf4j is only making things worse.
>> the only thing here that needs logging jars is the httpclient, and
>> because of that unfortunately commons-logging is needed.
>>
>> Fixing these dependencies makes the test log correctly. Still, bringing
>> in all this jetty etc is a really heavy-duty way to test. It would be
>> better to test this module without dragging in so many third party
>> dependencies.
>>
>> Index: ivy.xml
>> ===================================================================
>> --- ivy.xml (revision 1485538)
>> +++ ivy.xml (working copy)
>> @@ -39,8 +39,7 @@
>> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-io"
>> rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
>> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-continuation"
>> rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
>> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-http"
>> rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
>> - <dependency org="org.slf4j" name="slf4j-api" rev="1.6.6"
>> transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
>> - <dependency org="org.slf4j" name="jcl-over-slf4j" rev="1.6.6"
>> transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
>> + <dependency org="commons-logging" name="commons-logging" rev="1.1.3"
>> transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
>> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty.orbit" name="javax.servlet"
>> rev="3.0.0.v201112011016" transitive="false" conf="servlet->default">
>> <artifact name="javax.servlet" type="orbit" ext="jar"/>
>> </dependency>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Michael McCandless <
>> lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think we should do this, so we can debug why HttpReplicatorTest
>>> keeps failing on OS X / Java 1.6: maybe something is happening and the
>>> logs will give a clue ...
>>>
>>> Mike McCandless
>>>
>>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > put a log4j.properties as a resource or beside the test in svn.
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> Hi
>>> >>
>>> >> I noticed lucene/replicator tests output this warning:
>>> >>
>>> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Failed to load class
>>> >> "org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder".
>>> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Defaulting to no-operation (NOP) logger
>>> >> implementation
>>> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: See
>>> >> http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#StaticLoggerBinder for further
>>> details.
>>> >>
>>> >> In the webpage mentioned in the warning it's said that's because the
>>> >> classpath doesn't have one of slf4j bindings, e.g. slf4j-jdk.
>>> Replicator
>>> >> itself doesn't use logger at all, but InfoStream, so this must be
>>> something
>>> >> that comes from the Jetty libs.
>>> >>
>>> >> Is it a new thing? Do Solr tests output same warnings? Should we care
>>> about
>>> >> it?
>>> >>
>>> >> What's weird is that this is printed only when I run w/
>>> >> -Dtestscase=HttpReplicatorTest, but not if I run 'ant test'. Maybe
>>> that's
>>> >> related to the debug info test-framework outputs if a single test is
>>> run vs
>>> >> all?
>>> >>
>>> >> Shai
>>> >
>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> >
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com>.
Rob, personally I don't mind if SLF4J goes out ... the whole jetty
dependencies is required only for testing at the moment.
The question is, if you take it out, will we still be able to debug what's
going on during tests on the Jetty side?
Will Jetty dump everything it has to syserr if SLF4J is not present?
Shai
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:38 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I looked at this: i dont think this module should rely upon slf4j.
>
> Remember all this jetty stuff, is just for running this test.
> Jetty doesnt need slf4j (it just goes to system.err.println by default if
> slf4j isnt there), so slf4j is only making things worse.
> the only thing here that needs logging jars is the httpclient, and because
> of that unfortunately commons-logging is needed.
>
> Fixing these dependencies makes the test log correctly. Still, bringing in
> all this jetty etc is a really heavy-duty way to test. It would be better
> to test this module without dragging in so many third party dependencies.
>
> Index: ivy.xml
> ===================================================================
> --- ivy.xml (revision 1485538)
> +++ ivy.xml (working copy)
> @@ -39,8 +39,7 @@
> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-io"
> rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-continuation"
> rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-http"
> rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
> - <dependency org="org.slf4j" name="slf4j-api" rev="1.6.6"
> transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
> - <dependency org="org.slf4j" name="jcl-over-slf4j" rev="1.6.6"
> transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
> + <dependency org="commons-logging" name="commons-logging" rev="1.1.3"
> transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
> <dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty.orbit" name="javax.servlet"
> rev="3.0.0.v201112011016" transitive="false" conf="servlet->default">
> <artifact name="javax.servlet" type="orbit" ext="jar"/>
> </dependency>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Michael McCandless <
> lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>
>> I think we should do this, so we can debug why HttpReplicatorTest
>> keeps failing on OS X / Java 1.6: maybe something is happening and the
>> logs will give a clue ...
>>
>> Mike McCandless
>>
>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > put a log4j.properties as a resource or beside the test in svn.
>> >
>> > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Hi
>> >>
>> >> I noticed lucene/replicator tests output this warning:
>> >>
>> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Failed to load class
>> >> "org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder".
>> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Defaulting to no-operation (NOP) logger
>> >> implementation
>> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: See
>> >> http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#StaticLoggerBinder for further
>> details.
>> >>
>> >> In the webpage mentioned in the warning it's said that's because the
>> >> classpath doesn't have one of slf4j bindings, e.g. slf4j-jdk.
>> Replicator
>> >> itself doesn't use logger at all, but InfoStream, so this must be
>> something
>> >> that comes from the Jetty libs.
>> >>
>> >> Is it a new thing? Do Solr tests output same warnings? Should we care
>> about
>> >> it?
>> >>
>> >> What's weird is that this is printed only when I run w/
>> >> -Dtestscase=HttpReplicatorTest, but not if I run 'ant test'. Maybe
>> that's
>> >> related to the debug info test-framework outputs if a single test is
>> run vs
>> >> all?
>> >>
>> >> Shai
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com>.
I looked at this: i dont think this module should rely upon slf4j.
Remember all this jetty stuff, is just for running this test.
Jetty doesnt need slf4j (it just goes to system.err.println by default if
slf4j isnt there), so slf4j is only making things worse.
the only thing here that needs logging jars is the httpclient, and because
of that unfortunately commons-logging is needed.
Fixing these dependencies makes the test log correctly. Still, bringing in
all this jetty etc is a really heavy-duty way to test. It would be better
to test this module without dragging in so many third party dependencies.
Index: ivy.xml
===================================================================
--- ivy.xml (revision 1485538)
+++ ivy.xml (working copy)
@@ -39,8 +39,7 @@
<dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-io"
rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
<dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-continuation"
rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
<dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty" name="jetty-http"
rev="&jetty.version;" transitive="false" conf="jetty->default"/>
- <dependency org="org.slf4j" name="slf4j-api" rev="1.6.6"
transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
- <dependency org="org.slf4j" name="jcl-over-slf4j" rev="1.6.6"
transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
+ <dependency org="commons-logging" name="commons-logging" rev="1.1.3"
transitive="false" conf="logging->default"/>
<dependency org="org.eclipse.jetty.orbit" name="javax.servlet"
rev="3.0.0.v201112011016" transitive="false" conf="servlet->default">
<artifact name="javax.servlet" type="orbit" ext="jar"/>
</dependency>
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Michael McCandless <
lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> I think we should do this, so we can debug why HttpReplicatorTest
> keeps failing on OS X / Java 1.6: maybe something is happening and the
> logs will give a clue ...
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > put a log4j.properties as a resource or beside the test in svn.
> >
> > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> I noticed lucene/replicator tests output this warning:
> >>
> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Failed to load class
> >> "org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder".
> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Defaulting to no-operation (NOP) logger
> >> implementation
> >> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: See
> >> http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#StaticLoggerBinder for further details.
> >>
> >> In the webpage mentioned in the warning it's said that's because the
> >> classpath doesn't have one of slf4j bindings, e.g. slf4j-jdk. Replicator
> >> itself doesn't use logger at all, but InfoStream, so this must be
> something
> >> that comes from the Jetty libs.
> >>
> >> Is it a new thing? Do Solr tests output same warnings? Should we care
> about
> >> it?
> >>
> >> What's weird is that this is printed only when I run w/
> >> -Dtestscase=HttpReplicatorTest, but not if I run 'ant test'. Maybe
> that's
> >> related to the debug info test-framework outputs if a single test is
> run vs
> >> all?
> >>
> >> Shai
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com>.
I think we should do this, so we can debug why HttpReplicatorTest
keeps failing on OS X / Java 1.6: maybe something is happening and the
logs will give a clue ...
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> put a log4j.properties as a resource or beside the test in svn.
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I noticed lucene/replicator tests output this warning:
>>
>> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Failed to load class
>> "org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder".
>> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Defaulting to no-operation (NOP) logger
>> implementation
>> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: See
>> http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#StaticLoggerBinder for further details.
>>
>> In the webpage mentioned in the warning it's said that's because the
>> classpath doesn't have one of slf4j bindings, e.g. slf4j-jdk. Replicator
>> itself doesn't use logger at all, but InfoStream, so this must be something
>> that comes from the Jetty libs.
>>
>> Is it a new thing? Do Solr tests output same warnings? Should we care about
>> it?
>>
>> What's weird is that this is printed only when I run w/
>> -Dtestscase=HttpReplicatorTest, but not if I run 'ant test'. Maybe that's
>> related to the debug info test-framework outputs if a single test is run vs
>> all?
>>
>> Shai
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: SLF4J Binding Warnings
Posted by Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com>.
put a log4j.properties as a resource or beside the test in svn.
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I noticed lucene/replicator tests output this warning:
>
> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Failed to load class
> "org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder".
> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: Defaulting to no-operation (NOP) logger
> implementation
> [junit4:junit4] 2> SLF4J: See
> http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#StaticLoggerBinder for further details.
>
> In the webpage mentioned in the warning it's said that's because the
> classpath doesn't have one of slf4j bindings, e.g. slf4j-jdk. Replicator
> itself doesn't use logger at all, but InfoStream, so this must be something
> that comes from the Jetty libs.
>
> Is it a new thing? Do Solr tests output same warnings? Should we care about
> it?
>
> What's weird is that this is printed only when I run w/
> -Dtestscase=HttpReplicatorTest, but not if I run 'ant test'. Maybe that's
> related to the debug info test-framework outputs if a single test is run vs
> all?
>
> Shai
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org