This may be another documentation issue, or a lack of understanding on my part, but from my reading the SocketAppender does not support layouts. From the javadoc for socketappender. " SocketAppenders do not use a layout."
So if I want to send the same log events to a file and to chainsaw in an XML format using XMLLayout, how does one do this? Again my understanding is that SocketAppenders do not support layouts. What am I missing? Harry > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Deboy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 8:23 PM > To: Logging General > Subject: RE: Is Log4J Dead on the Java Platform? > > For clarification regarding XMLSocketAppender: > > Log4j provides a SocketAppender which sends serialized logging event > objects over a TCP socket. Chainsaw can receive these events using > SocketReceiver. > > XMLSocketAppender is provided by log4cxx, and provides provides a way for > the log4cxx framework to send logging events (in XML format) over a TCP > socket. Chainsaw can receive tehse events using XMLSocketReciever. > > In summary, log4j doesn't need an XMLSocketAppender because SocketAppender > already provides a way to send events over TCP. The only reason to > provide it would be if other logging frameworks also wanted to provide > receivers (interop), or for performance reasons (not likely). > > Scott > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Curt Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wed 5/18/2005 9:21 AM > To: Logging General > Cc: > Subject: Re: Is Log4J Dead on the Java Platform? > > On May 18, 2005, at 4:48 AM, Harry Hartley wrote: > > > I would like to assess where things really stand with Log4J before > > committing more of my project code to the log4j framework. > > > > > > > > I am an old time C and C++ developer, but fairly new to the java > > open source. It has taken some time, but I have figured out pretty > > much everything I feel I need to know to complete my web > > application. I have learned how to effectively use: Ant, Struts, > > Basic Tomcat Configuration, JSP's and Servlets, MySQL, ConnectorJ, > > Cascading Stylesheets, Log4J, server/context/web.xml files, blah, > > blah, and blah. > > > > > > > > As you can imagine it has been a process not without some > > frustration. Documentation ranges from obscure/poor to pretty good. > > I have become used to persisting where it seems as though there is > > NOTHING that documents how things work, but eventually I figure it > > out through surfing the web, or looking at source code. > > > > > > > > During the last couple of years while away from coding, all the > > java coders would tell me how great and simple log4j is. Thus I > > decided to use it in my current project. Again, my typical learning > > curve before I have any useful code/configuration. > > > > > > > > Which brings me to my question/observation: > > > > 1) The documentation for Log4J is pitiful. I have not purcha > > $ed the 'full' manual, and will not. Maybe its as simple as that. > > > > > Open-source documentation is common problem area. Most people who > contribute to open-source projects have some bug they want fixed or > some behavior they want added and contribute code. Very few people > come at a project motivated to explain it to others. The "full" > manual is a commercial offering by the project founder and is > generally well-regarded. However, the project would be open to > contributions. > > > 2) The download seems very incomplete. There are MANY > > directories that are empty. The various examples directories are > > incomplete. > > 3) There are references to classes in the documentation that > > do not exist. Specifically XMLSocketAppender. > Likely a mismatch between the software and documentation version. > > > 4) Since early this year, log4j mailing lists are essentially > > silent. > > > > > Both log4j-dev and log4j-user mailing list have had over 1000 > messages this year and 211 and 70 messages, respectively, this > month. You may have been using the Apache eyebrowse archive which > died never to rise again. Try using the MARC or GMANE links at > http://logging.apache.org/site/mailing-lists.html > > > > There seems to be more functionality in log4cxx. Is log4cxx the > > flagship and log4j the follower? > > > > > They are synergistic, but most time log4j leads. I'm the log4cxx > lead and a log4j committer. If I find something missing or broken, I > typically add or fix in first in log4j and then log4cxx. > > > > Java based Chainsaw has several receivers that are not supported > > by appenders under log4j? Again, specifically XMLSocketAppender. > > Again possibly a mismatch between Chainsaw and log4j versions. Maybe > somebody else could answer this better. > > > > > > The 'full' manual is for a fee, is this standard practice under > > apache? This is the first time I've seen this under the apache > > initiative. > > > > > > "log4j: The complete manual" is a commercial offering by one of the > log4j developers. Quite a few commercial books on Apache projects > are written by committers on the respective project. http:// > jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/resources.html lists books related to > Tomcat and highlights authors names that are also Tomcat committers. > That might be a better pattern than what is currently on the web site. > > > I notice that tomcat itself seems to opt for a default of > > java.util.logging and support log4j as a compatibility issue. Is > > this accurate? > > > > > I'll let someone else answer that since it is a technically and > politically complex issue. > > > > > > > My title begs the question, is log4J essentially dead? > > > > > No. > > > > Or maybe I should ask a slightly different question. What is the > > best logging package to use with tomcat? > > Different question, probably should be asked in a different forum > (tomcat-users?) after searching their archives (again avoiding > eyebrowse). > > > >
