commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Cohen" <SCo...@sportvision.com>
Subject RE: DEBUG vs. TRACE under Log4JLogger
Date Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:21:49 GMT
Thanks, Craig.  Nonetheless, however, I am stymied by the autodetection
problem.  I really don't understand how to make JBoss see my new logger,
however it is written.  The default Log4JLogger seems to be loaded
regardless of what I do.

-----Original Message-----
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:craigmcc@apache.org] 
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:17 AM
To: Jakarta Commons Users List
Subject: Re: DEBUG vs. TRACE under Log4JLogger


Steve Cohen wrote:

>Actually, I can't do what you suggest.  Log4JLogger is declared final. 
>So only the "create your own" option will work.
>
Yuck.  Fixed in tonight's nightly build (20031003).

Craig

>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Steve Cohen
>Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 6:19 AM
>To: Jakarta Commons Users List; Jakarta Commons Users List
>Subject: RE: DEBUG vs. TRACE under Log4JLogger
>
>
>
>OK, I stand corrected.  I was the victim of my own misunderstanding.  I

>will do what you suggest.  Thanks.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:	Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:craigmcc@apache.org]
>Sent:	Thu 10/2/2003 12:21 AM
>To:	Jakarta Commons Users List
>Cc:	
>Subject:	Re: DEBUG vs. TRACE under Log4JLogger
>Steve Cohen wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Well, I understand what you're saying, but now I've had the nasty
>>surprise of upgrading to 1.0.3 under the assumption that TRACE would
be
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>a no-op under log4j only to find that it's been redefined out from
>>under me.  You haven't commented on my question as to whether that's 
>>the way it used to work but I have a pretty strong remembrance that 
>>that's what it did.  I remember a pretty nasty RTFM from the Log4j 
>>people when I asked them why trace() did nothing.
>>
>>Unfortunately I can't find the old docs.
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>A browse through the CVS history of Log4JLogger (and its predecessor,
>Log4JCategoryLog) will show that the Log4J wrapper has *always* mapped 
>TRACE level output to Log4J's DEBUG level output, from the very
>beginning.
>
>http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-commons/logging/src/java/org/apac
>h
>e/commons/logging/impl/
>
>  
>
>>I still don't see what the problem would be in giving the user the
>>NON-DEFAULT option of treating trace as a no-op.  However, I guess I 
>>can do what you suggest without too much difficulty.
>>
>>    
>>
>We do give you this option -- implement a subclass of Log4JLogger (or
>create your own -- it's pretty simple) and use that instead.
>
>Craig
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>  
>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message