It's a kind of growing pain with the success of Commons. Some servers have some commons jars while others not. In the application you always include jars you needed. At the end of day, situation like that seems inevitable, not just logging, not mention the version problem.
Is it possible some standard be set or a classloader component in Commons? - sean --- Ojares Rami EINT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well put Norbert. > I think that since classloading and threads are such complex > issues there should be a way to not use the pattern > of loading the implementation from thread's context classloader. > (Hint to Craig :) > > - rami > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Norbert Klose [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 12:21 PM > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: commons-logging & classloading (continued) > > > > > >Hello, > > > >i currently use Tomcat 4.1.27 bundled with commons-logging > >1.0.3. My own webapp i'm working on also uses commons-logging, > >so i include a copy of the jar file into the WEB-INF/lib > >directory to be protable to other servlet containers that does > >not include the commons-logging package. I found some > >discussions in the mail archive that is about commons-logging > >and its class loading strategy. But as i could not found an > >anwser to my problem, i post my problem here again, hoping to > >get a hint for a solution (or maybe to settle on a new consens). > > > >The problem is, that when tomcat wants to anser a HTTPS > >request it instantiates a Http11ConnectionHandler which > >processes the connection. > >The Http11ConnectionHandler instance itself instantiates a > >JSSE14Support class which itself instantiates a > >org.apache.commons.logging.Log implementation class. Because > >the thread that runs the Http11ConnectionHandler has the > >WebappClassloader of my web application as its > >context class loader (which ist used by commons-logging to > >load the Log implementation (logClass)), BUT the > >org.apache.commons.logging.Log interface itself was loaded > >from the Common StandardClassLoader, the predicate in > >LogFactoryImpl.getLogConstructor() > > > > (!Log.class.isAssignableFrom(logClass)) > > > >is false, so that LogFactoryImpl.getLogConstructor() throws a > >LogConfigurationException. Because both classes are loaded > >from different classloaders. > > > >IMHO what commons-logging MUST ensure to work correctly is, > >that the logClass is loaded from the same classloader than the > >Log.class is and this is not guaranteed by the current > >implementation! For example > > > > protected static ClassLoader getContextClassLoader() > > throws LogConfigurationException > > { > > return Log.class.getClassLoader(); > > } > > > >would do. BUT to keep the current implementation what about > >changing LogFactoryImpl.getLogConstructor(), so that the > >correct predicate is evaluated? > > > > protected Constructor getLogConstructor() > > throws LogConfigurationException { > > > > ... > > > > logClass = loadClass(logClassName); > > ___logClass___ = > >loadClass("org.apache.commons.logging.Log") // > >something like this... > > if (logClass == null) { > > throw new LogConfigurationException > > ("No suitable Log implementation for " + > >logClassName); > > } > > if (!___logClass___.class.isAssignableFrom(logClass)) { > > ... > > } > > > > ... > > > > } > > > >The problem with the current implementation is, that > >commons-logging can not rely on the fact that the threads > >current context class loader is the classloader that the class > >(like the JSSE14Support above) wants to get its logging > >implementation from!!! > > > >Is there a chance to get a consens on that, or at least to > >think about changing the current implemetation making it more > >reliable ? > > > >Kindly regards, > >Norbert. > >-- > >__________________________________________________________ > >Sign-up for your own personalized E-mail at Mail.com > >http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup > > > >CareerBuilder.com has over 400,000 jobs. Be smarter about your > >job search > >http://corp.mail.com/careers > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
