1.2.12 Final Build

[Mark Womack <mw...@apache.org>]

I hope.

http://cvs.apache.org/builds/logging/log4j/log4j-1.2.12

For some reason all of the .class files are different than the 1.2.12rc6 
build.  I don't know why.  I verified that jdk 1.3.1_16 was used to do the 
build.

Curt, can you run this version through the battery of tests in your 
environment setup?

And getting something like vmware setup on machine is the next order of 
business for me.  We need something like that to maintain/control the build 
environment better.

-Mark 



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org

Re: 1.2.12 Final Build

[Andreas Fester <An...@gmx.de>]

> And getting something like vmware setup on machine is the next order of 
> business for me.  We need something like that to maintain/control the 

you might consider qemu at http://www.qemu.org/
Has less virtual hardware support than vmware, but is easy to set up
and should be enough to set up a build environment. I am running both
Linux on Linux and Windows XP on Linux with it. Performance is quite
good on a laptop with a mobile Intel 1.7GHz laptop, especially with
their accelerator module.

Regards,

	Andreas

-- 
Andreas Fester
mailto:andreas@littletux.net
WWW: http://www.littletux.net
ICQ: 326674288

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org

Re: 1.2.12 Final Build

[Curt Arnold <ca...@apache.org>]

On Aug 30, 2005, at 12:45 AM, Mark Womack wrote:

> I hope.
>
> http://cvs.apache.org/builds/logging/log4j/log4j-1.2.12
>
> For some reason all of the .class files are different than the  
> 1.2.12rc6 build.  I don't know why.  I verified that jdk 1.3.1_16  
> was used to do the build.

This build and rc6 appeared consistent with each other to me.   
Neither build was not consistent with my local builds and I do not  
know why.  I thought I had checked that previously, but either  
something changed or I've at least one of the comparisons incorrectly.

I was surprised that Ant 1.6.4 was being used for your builds, but  
downgrading from Ant 1.6.5 did not seem to affect the produced build  
other than the manifest.

For analysis, it would be interesting to see the log file created by  
doing:

ant clean
ant release -v -l build.log

>
> Curt, can you run this version through the battery of tests in your  
> environment setup?

Reran tests on Windows 2000 + JDK 1.1.8, 1.2.2, 1.3.1_16, 1.4.2, and  
1.5.0 with no problems.

>
> And getting something like vmware setup on machine is the next  
> order of business for me.  We need something like that to maintain/ 
> control the build environment better.

I think a LiveCD approach like Knoppix would be a better solution for  
the release build environment for log4j 1.3 and later.

However VM's are great for testing releases on various OS+JDK  
combinations.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org