I say we keep it simple: Deliver log4j-api-java9 as an add-on to log4j-api
instead of being clever with log4j-api embedding Java 9 classes a la
Titanic.
Thoughts?
Gary
On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I do not think that is how Android development works. The .class files are
> converted to .dex files from what I can tell, a different byte code format
> used by both Dalvik (discontinued) and ART.
>
> Gary
>
> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
>> Is it trying to process the class files generated by java? I thought
>> Android compiled Java source. If it is looking at class files then it
>> needs to ignore everything under META-INF
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> > On Jul 8, 2017, at 5:58 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > We are worst off with our 2.9-SNAPSHOT, I can't even build an app using
>> > only log4j-api:
>> >
>> > AGPBI: {"kind":"error","text":"Error converting bytecode to dex:\nCause:
>> > Dex cannot parse version 53 byte code.\nThis is caused by library
>> > dependencies that have been compiled using Java 8 or above.\nIf you are
>> > using the \u0027java\u0027 gradle plugin in a library submodule add
>> > \ntargetCompatibility \u003d \u00271.7\u0027\nsourceCompatibility
>> \u003d
>> > \u00271.7\u0027\nto that submodule\u0027s build.gradle
>> > file.","sources":[{}],"original":"UNEXPECTED TOP-LEVEL
>> > EXCEPTION:\njava.lang.RuntimeException: Exception parsing classes\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main.processClass(Main.java:781)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main.processFileBytes(Main.java:747)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main.access$1200(Main.java:88)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main$FileBytesConsumer.processF
>> ileBytes(Main.java:1689)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.cf.direct.ClassPathOpener.processArchive(Clas
>> sPathOpener.java:284)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.cf.direct.ClassPathOpener.processOne(ClassPat
>> hOpener.java:166)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.cf.direct.ClassPathOpener.process(ClassPathOp
>> ener.java:144)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main.processOne(Main.java:695)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main.processAllFiles(Main.java:592)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main.runMultiDex(Main.java:376)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main.run(Main.java:290)\n\tat
>> > com.android.builder.internal.compiler.DexWrapper.run(DexWrap
>> per.java:54)\n\tat
>> > com.android.builder.core.DexByteCodeConverter.lambda$dexInPr
>> ocess$0(DexByteCodeConverter.java:174)\n\tat
>> > java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:266)\n\tat
>> > java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPool
>> Executor.java:1142)\n\tat
>> > java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoo
>> lExecutor.java:617)\n\tat
>> > java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)\nCaused by:
>> > com.android.dx.cf.iface.ParseException: bad class file magic
>> (cafebabe) or
>> > version (0035.0000)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.cf.direct.DirectClassFile.parse0(DirectClassF
>> ile.java:476)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.cf.direct.DirectClassFile.parse(DirectClassFi
>> le.java:406)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.cf.direct.DirectClassFile.parseToInterfacesIf
>> Necessary(DirectClassFile.java:388)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.cf.direct.DirectClassFile.getMagic(DirectClas
>> sFile.java:251)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main.parseClass(Main.java:793)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main.access$1600(Main.java:88)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main$ClassParserTask.call(Main.
>> java:1728)\n\tat
>> > com.android.dx.command.dexer.Main.processClass(Main.java:779)\n\t... 16
>> > more\n","tool":"Dex"}
>> > AGPBI: {"kind":"error","text":"1 error; aborting","sources":[{}]}
>> >
>> > Can we split off this Java 9 stuff in a separate module?
>> >
>> > Gary
>> >
>> >> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> If you've got some instructions on how to even get an Android project
>> up
>> >> and running, getting some test code to play with would certainly help.
>> Long
>> >> ago when I tried debugging some Android issues with Log4j, I couldn't
>> even
>> >> get that far. :/
>> >>
>> >>> On 8 July 2017 at 17:31, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> A quick follow up to note that with 2.8.2, using log4j-api does not
>> cause
>> >>> problems but then adding log4j-core causes the app to fail to start.
>> So I
>> >>> definitively see an Android epic for 2.10. Maybe this is when we want
>> to
>> >>> split up log4j-core.
>> >>>
>> >>> Gary
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> So here I am with my family our of town on a weekend, and I thought
>> I'd
>> >>>> give Log4j on Android a try.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The first thing I run into is:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> FAILURE: Build failed with an exception.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> * What went wrong:
>> >>>> Execution failed for task ':Application:transformResourc
>> esWithMergeJav
>> >>>> aResForDebug'.
>> >>>>> com.android.build.api.transform.TransformException:
>> >>>> com.android.builder.packaging.DuplicateFileException: Duplicate
>> files
>> >>>> copied in APK META-INF/LICENSE
>> >>>> File1: C:\Users\ggregory\.gradle\caches\modules-2\files-2.1\
>> >>>> org.apache.logging.log4j\log4j-core\2.8.2\
>> >> 979fc0cf8460302e4ffbfe38c1b66a
>> >>>> 99450b0bb7\log4j-core-2.8.2.jar
>> >>>> File2: C:\Users\ggregory\.gradle\caches\modules-2\files-2.1\
>> >>>> org.apache.logging.log4j\log4j-api\2.8.2\
>> >> e590eeb783348ce8ddef205b82127f
>> >>>> 9084d82bf3\log4j-api-2.8.2.jar
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> * Try:
>> >>>> Run with --stacktrace option to get the stack trace. Run with --info
>> or
>> >>>> --debug option to get more log output.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> BUILD FAILED
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Total time: 1.995 secs
>> >>>>
>> >>>> which is solved by:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/37586800/android-
>> >>>> gradle-duplicate-files-copied-in-apk-meta-inf-license-txt
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Which means I have to add this to my build:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> packagingOptions {
>> >>>> exclude 'META-INF/DEPENDENCIES'
>> >>>> exclude 'META-INF/LICENSE'
>> >>>> }
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I wonder if we should generate these files pretending we are in an
>> uber
>> >>> jar, either:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> - with the project name in the name like META-INF/log4j2.LICENSE
>> >>>>
>> >>>> - with maven AID in the name like META-INF/log4j-api.LICENSE
>> >>>>
>> >>>> - with maven coords in the name like META-INF/org.apache.logging.
>> >>> log4j-log4j-api.LICENSE
>> >>>>
>> >>>> As an aside files like LICENSE and NOTICE do not have .txt extensions
>> >>> which is lame IMO.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ignore and do nothing? Thoughts?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Gary
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
>
