Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list commons-user@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 63882 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2003 20:05:37 -0000 Received: from icarus.apache.org (208.185.179.13) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Jun 2003 20:05:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 7124 invoked by uid 1059); 3 Jun 2003 20:05:36 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 3 Jun 2003 20:05:36 -0000 Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:05:36 -0700 (PDT) From: "Craig R. McClanahan" To: Jakarta Commons Users List , ajack@TrySybase.com Subject: Re: [Logging] What I find unfriendly about commons-logging... In-Reply-To: <011001c329fc$58f75f10$34cbea43@wdn086> Message-ID: <20030603130004.V4847@icarus.apache.org> References: <011001c329fc$58f75f10$34cbea43@wdn086> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: localhost 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Tue, 3 Jun 2003, Adam Jack wrote: > Further, the defaults seem terrible. If I run in JDK 1.4 (and have logging > configured) and C-L picks up the JDK1.4 driver, then I ought not need a C-L > properties file to see log messages. IMHO whatever the underlying > configuration has set-up, ought be accepted. For whatever reason I can get > JDK1.4 working, but never get it working inside C-L. That seems pretty > bogus. It's not at all obvious why you think you need to configure C-L in this environment. I use exactly this combination all day long (JDK 1.4, C-L, building webapps running on Tomcat, no Log4J installed) and never configure C-L at all. The config settings get picked up from $JAVA_HOME/jre/lib/logging.properties just like they are supposed to. The only gotcha when doing this under Tomcat is you have to restart Tomcat to get changes to the 1.4 settings to take effect, because by default JDK 1.4 logging only self-configures at startup time -- but that's a JDK issue. > > Just my tuppence, and no -- I don't have a patch to fix it all, sorry. > > regards, > > Adam Craig