Re: Flushing FileAppender explicitly

2013-03-25 Thread adischlesinger
know why basic functionality is much more obscured compared to 1.x. But this may be because the increase in complexity. -- View this message in context: http://apache-logging.6191.n7.nabble.com/Flushing-FileAppender-explicitly-tp36205p36285.html Sent from the Log4j - Users mailing list archive

Re: Flushing FileAppender explicitly

2013-03-25 Thread Ralph Goers
obscured compared to 1.x. But this may be because the increase in complexity. -- View this message in context: http://apache-logging.6191.n7.nabble.com/Flushing-FileAppender-explicitly-tp36205p36285.html Sent from the Log4j - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com

Re: Flushing FileAppender explicitly

2013-03-23 Thread Ralph Goers
this message in context: http://apache-logging.6191.n7.nabble.com/Flushing-FileAppender-explicitly-tp36205.html Sent from the Log4j - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr

Flushing FileAppender explicitly

2013-03-18 Thread adischlesinger
to find out, pertains to a manager member which cannot be accessed. The RollingFileAppender is also final an cannot be extended. Thanks! Adrian -- View this message in context: http://apache-logging.6191.n7.nabble.com/Flushing-FileAppender-explicitly-tp36205.html Sent from the Log4j - Users