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 Joerg Hohwiller <jo...@j-hohwiller.de> on 2005/10/09 22:47:15 UTC
Re: [logging] log4j 1.3 support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hello world!
Joerg Hohwiller wrote:
> Joerg Hohwiller wrote:
>
>>>Jörg Schaible wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Simon Kitching wrote:
>>>
>>>Hi there,
>
> Hi again,
>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>I can not see all your guyz problems. I replaced Priority with Level and removed
>>>the "isAsignableFrom" section and everyting works and compiles fine. Even the
>>>TRACE is defined in Level and Priority so there is not even reflection magic
>>>required.
>>>Am I missing something??? Maybe I should get the 1.3 alpha release and have a
>>>look if I can find the problem Simon was talking about...
>>>The tests all worked excellent with 1.2.12 and Log4j12Logger works fine with
>>>prior versions. And as I said that is how the log4j guyz told to do it a long
>>>time ago. I did not check this with log4j versions prior than 1.2.6. But as I
>>>pointed out earlier, the Log4J12Logger is using the log4j type "Logger" anyways
>>>and that came together with the type "Level".
>>>Maybe we do not even need two Log4j Loggers - what do you think?
>
> Is it if you compile the jcl againts log4j 1.2 and then run it with 1.3 and vice
> versa? Maybe that is the point I did not think about earlier...
> I will check when I find the time.
Exactly this is the point. This issue really hurts. Has someone already pointed
this out on the log4j mailing list. I am not sure if they see this issue so
clearly, do they?
In the end I have to agree that there is no clean and easy way to support both
log4j 1.2 and 1.3 in one logger. There is a way though, but nobody will want it.
Additionally the Log4J12Logger has to be compiled against log4j-1.2 and
Log4J13Logger has to be compiled againts log4j-1.3 but both go to the same jar.
This issue could not even be handled with m2 (maven2).
>
>>>>>- Jörg
>>>
>>>Regards
>>> Jörg
>
> Jörg
and me again ;)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDSYHTmPuec2Dcv/8RAkjBAJ9huGHVNhQqWWahkNt2+MV0FKnyGwCfQK9e
jPOLGQXBTEvT3DkZCkkUTQg=
=Q927
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: [logging] log4j 1.3 support
Posted by Joerg Hohwiller <jo...@j-hohwiller.de>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi there,
Simon Kitching wrote:
> nb: top-posting, esp. in reply to a thread that already uses
> bottom-posting, makes an email *really* hard to read!
>
> On Sun, 2005-10-09 at 22:59 -0500, Jacob Kjome wrote:
>
>>Can the problem be restated? Seems like this email catches the end of a
>>conversation. What is the issue at hand?
I am sorry for this. I wanted to have the issue raised on this list, but
very little time at the moment. Thanks to Simon for making this clear.
>
>
>
> This bugzilla entry has some of the relevant history.
> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34437
>
> This thread has more discussion:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/log4j-dev@logging.apache.org/msg04408.html
>
>
>
>>As for TRACE, that is new to Log4j-1.2.12 and didn't exist in versions
>>previous to it. If it doesn't exist in a 1.3 alpha binary release yet, it
>>will. There are plans to get a new 1.3 alpha build out soon. There's been
>>a lot of work done in the source to make 1.3 more compatible with 1.2,
>>which wasn't the plan early on in 1.3's development. But now the thought
>>is try to keep 1.3 as compatible with 1.2 as possible. If you are worried
>>that the current alpha is incompatible with the 1.2.xx branch, please try
>>building Log4j-1.3 from source and then compile against that. That will
>>provide a much better test of JCL 1.2.xx and 1.3 compatibility.
>
>
> That's nice to hear.
I agree. I will let you know when I checked the latest 1.3 from HEAD.
>
> Regards,
>
> Simon
Take care
Jörg
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDTDI4mPuec2Dcv/8RAhyEAKCA6+UI8bnOxxel5VO1gDjKl3MNbgCfWoI1
D0lwKcJRlU+LfiGsjG3iMfo=
=EQ4z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [logging] log4j 1.3 support
Posted by Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>.
nb: top-posting, esp. in reply to a thread that already uses
bottom-posting, makes an email *really* hard to read!
On Sun, 2005-10-09 at 22:59 -0500, Jacob Kjome wrote:
> Can the problem be restated? Seems like this email catches the end of a
> conversation. What is the issue at hand?
This bugzilla entry has some of the relevant history.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34437
This thread has more discussion:
http://www.mail-archive.com/log4j-dev@logging.apache.org/msg04408.html
>
> As for TRACE, that is new to Log4j-1.2.12 and didn't exist in versions
> previous to it. If it doesn't exist in a 1.3 alpha binary release yet, it
> will. There are plans to get a new 1.3 alpha build out soon. There's been
> a lot of work done in the source to make 1.3 more compatible with 1.2,
> which wasn't the plan early on in 1.3's development. But now the thought
> is try to keep 1.3 as compatible with 1.2 as possible. If you are worried
> that the current alpha is incompatible with the 1.2.xx branch, please try
> building Log4j-1.3 from source and then compile against that. That will
> provide a much better test of JCL 1.2.xx and 1.3 compatibility.
That's nice to hear.
Regards,
Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [logging] log4j 1.3 support
Posted by Jess Holle <je...@ptc.com>.
Jacob Kjome wrote:
> Can the problem be restated? Seems like this email catches the end of
> a conversation. What is the issue at hand?
>
> As for TRACE, that is new to Log4j-1.2.12 and didn't exist in versions
> previous to it. If it doesn't exist in a 1.3 alpha binary release
> yet, it will. There are plans to get a new 1.3 alpha build out soon.
> There's been a lot of work done in the source to make 1.3 more
> compatible with 1.2, which wasn't the plan early on in 1.3's
> development. But now the thought is try to keep 1.3 as compatible
> with 1.2 as possible. If you are worried that the current alpha is
> incompatible with the 1.2.xx branch, please try building Log4j-1.3
> from source and then compile against that. That will provide a much
> better test of JCL 1.2.xx and 1.3 compatibility.
I've written code that listens to the logger hierachy for appender
addition and in that case at least writing one batch of code that is 1.2
and 1.3 compatible seems impossible -- at least without using dynamic
proxies or some such, which I've not yet ventured to do.
The issue is that there are still 1.2 APIs that do not provide an
equivalent based on Level or Logger and are still based on Priority and
Category.
There were other issues too, but I'd figured out less ways around them.
This is where I gave up.
--
Jess Holle
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [logging] log4j 1.3 support
Posted by Jacob Kjome <ho...@visi.com>.
Can the problem be restated? Seems like this email catches the end of a
conversation. What is the issue at hand?
As for TRACE, that is new to Log4j-1.2.12 and didn't exist in versions
previous to it. If it doesn't exist in a 1.3 alpha binary release yet, it
will. There are plans to get a new 1.3 alpha build out soon. There's been
a lot of work done in the source to make 1.3 more compatible with 1.2,
which wasn't the plan early on in 1.3's development. But now the thought
is try to keep 1.3 as compatible with 1.2 as possible. If you are worried
that the current alpha is incompatible with the 1.2.xx branch, please try
building Log4j-1.3 from source and then compile against that. That will
provide a much better test of JCL 1.2.xx and 1.3 compatibility.
Jake
At 10:47 PM 10/9/2005 +0200, you wrote:
>This mail was signed (Inlined PGP-Message).
>
>,-----GnuPG output follows (current time: Sun, Oct 09 2005 - 22:35:32)--
>|
>| Signature made 10/09/05 15:47:15 using DSA key ID 60DCBFFF
>| Can't check signature: public key not found
>|
>`---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Hello world!
>
>Joerg Hohwiller wrote:
>> Joerg Hohwiller wrote:
>>
>>>>Jörg Schaible wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Simon Kitching wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Hi there,
>>
>> Hi again,
>>
>>>>[snip]
>>>>
>>>>I can not see all your guyz problems. I replaced Priority with Level and
>removed
>>>>the "isAsignableFrom" section and everyting works and compiles fine. Even
>the
>>>>TRACE is defined in Level and Priority so there is not even reflection
magic
>>>>required.
>>>>Am I missing something??? Maybe I should get the 1.3 alpha release and
>have a
>>>>look if I can find the problem Simon was talking about...
>>>>The tests all worked excellent with 1.2.12 and Log4j12Logger works
fine with
>>>>prior versions. And as I said that is how the log4j guyz told to do it a
>long
>>>>time ago. I did not check this with log4j versions prior than 1.2.6. But
>as I
>>>>pointed out earlier, the Log4J12Logger is using the log4j type "Logger"
>anyways
>>>>and that came together with the type "Level".
>>>>Maybe we do not even need two Log4j Loggers - what do you think?
>>
>> Is it if you compile the jcl againts log4j 1.2 and then run it with 1.3
>and vice
>> versa? Maybe that is the point I did not think about earlier...
>> I will check when I find the time.
>Exactly this is the point. This issue really hurts. Has someone already
pointed
>this out on the log4j mailing list. I am not sure if they see this issue so
>clearly, do they?
>
>In the end I have to agree that there is no clean and easy way to support
both
>log4j 1.2 and 1.3 in one logger. There is a way though, but nobody will want
>it.
>Additionally the Log4J12Logger has to be compiled against log4j-1.2 and
>Log4J13Logger has to be compiled againts log4j-1.3 but both go to the
same jar.
>This issue could not even be handled with m2 (maven2).
>>
>>>>>>- Jörg
>>>>
>>>>Regards
>>>> Jörg
>>
>> Jörg
>and me again ;)
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
>Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>iD8DBQFDSYHTmPuec2Dcv/8RAkjBAJ9huGHVNhQqWWahkNt2+MV0FKnyGwCfQK9e
>jPOLGQXBTEvT3DkZCkkUTQg=
>=Q927
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: [logging] log4j 1.3 support
Posted by Jacob Kjome <ho...@visi.com>.
Can the problem be restated? Seems like this email catches the end of a
conversation. What is the issue at hand?
As for TRACE, that is new to Log4j-1.2.12 and didn't exist in versions
previous to it. If it doesn't exist in a 1.3 alpha binary release yet, it
will. There are plans to get a new 1.3 alpha build out soon. There's been
a lot of work done in the source to make 1.3 more compatible with 1.2,
which wasn't the plan early on in 1.3's development. But now the thought
is try to keep 1.3 as compatible with 1.2 as possible. If you are worried
that the current alpha is incompatible with the 1.2.xx branch, please try
building Log4j-1.3 from source and then compile against that. That will
provide a much better test of JCL 1.2.xx and 1.3 compatibility.
Jake
At 10:47 PM 10/9/2005 +0200, you wrote:
>This mail was signed (Inlined PGP-Message).
>
>,-----GnuPG output follows (current time: Sun, Oct 09 2005 - 22:35:32)--
>|
>| Signature made 10/09/05 15:47:15 using DSA key ID 60DCBFFF
>| Can't check signature: public key not found
>|
>`---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Hello world!
>
>Joerg Hohwiller wrote:
>> Joerg Hohwiller wrote:
>>
>>>>Jörg Schaible wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Simon Kitching wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Hi there,
>>
>> Hi again,
>>
>>>>[snip]
>>>>
>>>>I can not see all your guyz problems. I replaced Priority with Level and
>removed
>>>>the "isAsignableFrom" section and everyting works and compiles fine. Even
>the
>>>>TRACE is defined in Level and Priority so there is not even reflection
magic
>>>>required.
>>>>Am I missing something??? Maybe I should get the 1.3 alpha release and
>have a
>>>>look if I can find the problem Simon was talking about...
>>>>The tests all worked excellent with 1.2.12 and Log4j12Logger works
fine with
>>>>prior versions. And as I said that is how the log4j guyz told to do it a
>long
>>>>time ago. I did not check this with log4j versions prior than 1.2.6. But
>as I
>>>>pointed out earlier, the Log4J12Logger is using the log4j type "Logger"
>anyways
>>>>and that came together with the type "Level".
>>>>Maybe we do not even need two Log4j Loggers - what do you think?
>>
>> Is it if you compile the jcl againts log4j 1.2 and then run it with 1.3
>and vice
>> versa? Maybe that is the point I did not think about earlier...
>> I will check when I find the time.
>Exactly this is the point. This issue really hurts. Has someone already
pointed
>this out on the log4j mailing list. I am not sure if they see this issue so
>clearly, do they?
>
>In the end I have to agree that there is no clean and easy way to support
both
>log4j 1.2 and 1.3 in one logger. There is a way though, but nobody will want
>it.
>Additionally the Log4J12Logger has to be compiled against log4j-1.2 and
>Log4J13Logger has to be compiled againts log4j-1.3 but both go to the
same jar.
>This issue could not even be handled with m2 (maven2).
>>
>>>>>>- Jörg
>>>>
>>>>Regards
>>>> Jörg
>>
>> Jörg
>and me again ;)
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
>Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>iD8DBQFDSYHTmPuec2Dcv/8RAkjBAJ9huGHVNhQqWWahkNt2+MV0FKnyGwCfQK9e
>jPOLGQXBTEvT3DkZCkkUTQg=
>=Q927
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org