logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: Log4J 1.x and JDK 9
Date Thu, 14 Jul 2016 16:02:00 GMT
That would rule out building on a Mac.  I’d have to try it from a Linux VM.  I think Gary
might have built Log4j 1 in the past.

Ralph

> On Jul 14, 2016, at 8:52 AM, Paul Benedict <pbenedict@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Matt, I guess you need JDK 1.4.2 on your machine to have artifact "sun.jdk:tools:jar:1.4.2".
> 
> Cheers,
> Paul
> 
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <mailto:boards@gmail.com>>
wrote:
> How do you even build log4j 1.2? I get this error when I build from trunk:
> 
> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2:run (javadoc.resources)
on project log4j: Execution javadoc.resources of goal org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2:run
failed: Plugin org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2 or one of its dependencies
could not be resolved: Could not find artifact sun.jdk:tools:jar:1.4.2 at specified path /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_66.jdk/Contents/Home/jre/../Classes/classes.jar
-> [Help 1]
> 
> On 14 July 2016 at 10:47, Remko Popma <remko.popma@gmail.com <mailto:remko.popma@gmail.com>>
wrote:
> Why would we want to do that? We need to make sure that Log4j 2 works well with Java
9, but otherwise I think this is an excellent opportunity for users to upgrade to Log4j 2.
> 
> Remko
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Paul Benedict <pbenedict@apache.org <mailto:pbenedict@apache.org>>
wrote:
> According to this poster, it appears 1.x is not compatible with JDK 9:
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2016-July/008654.html <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2016-July/008654.html>
> 
> I told them I would notify our development community. So here's the notification. :-)

> 
> Given how widely used 1.x is still, what do you guys think of one more 1.x release? Usually
I would never entertain the suggestion, but this may be the one time the justification makes
sense. For those who still use 1.x and have no time to upgrade to 2.x, I can't think of a
better way to support the user community than fix this issue.
> 
> PS: Inside the post is a link to the supposed patch.
> 
> WDYT?
> 
> Cheers,
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <mailto:boards@gmail.com>>
> 


Mime
View raw message