Here are latest results.
> ls dist/lib/log4jME.jar
-rw-r--r-- 23045 Aug 1 19:40 dist/lib/log4jME.jar
> jar tvf dist/lib/log4jME.jar
0 org/
0 org/apache/
0 org/apache/log4j/
380 org/apache/log4j/Appender.class
1776 org/apache/log4j/AppenderSkeleton.class
4975 org/apache/log4j/Category.class
1024 org/apache/log4j/CategoryKey.class
3807 org/apache/log4j/FileAppender.class
0 org/apache/log4j/helpers/
373 org/apache/log4j/helpers/FormattingInfo.class
1855 org/apache/log4j/helpers/LogLog.class
630 org/apache/log4j/helpers/NullEnumeration.class
658 org/apache/log4j/helpers/OAErrorHandler.class
1348 org/apache/log4j/helpers/PatternConverter.class
1001 org/apache/log4j/helpers/PatternParser$BasicPatternConverter.class
936 org/apache/log4j/helpers/PatternParser$CategoryPatternConverter.class
744 org/apache/log4j/helpers/PatternParser$LiteralPatternConverter.class
4224 org/apache/log4j/helpers/PatternParser.class
972 org/apache/log4j/helpers/QuietWriter.class
2814 org/apache/log4j/Hierarchy.class
663 org/apache/log4j/Layout.class
2002 org/apache/log4j/PatternLayout.class
1793 org/apache/log4j/Priority.class
290 org/apache/log4j/ProvisionNode.class
0 org/apache/log4j/spi/
1721 org/apache/log4j/spi/LoggingEvent.class
160 org/apache/log4j/spi/OptionHandler.class
941 org/apache/log4j/spi/RootCategory.class
0 META-INF/
167 META-INF/MANIFEST.MF
At 11:50 01.08.2001 -0500, you wrote:
>> -rw-r--r-- 1 544 cgu 29103 Aug 1 14:41 dist/lib/log4jME.jar
>
>Hey, that's pretty cool. Especially in that it's using the log4j code base
>unchanged.
The code base is similar but different.
>I was thinking something a bit more radical in it's impact on log4j's functionality,
>but probably much smaller in footprint.
What's the point of a 5K footprint?
>Although I haven't tried it, it seems like we could create a new
>org.apache.log4j.Category class that turns things like addAppender and callAppenders
>into no-ops, sends all of the debug, error, fatal, info and warn messaged to stdout
>or stderr, and always returns the same singleton value for getInstance. If we wanted
>to be clever we might add the ability to turn logging on or off per category or
>message type.
>
>Would support for the Category methods alone cover most everyone's use of log4j? If
>so we should be able to support that in a single class or so, probably well under 5k
>in binary, and still maintain API compatibility with log4j.
>
>Ideally I think we should lobby the log4j folks to create the minimal log4j binary,
>which may entail a bit of refactoring to get it all to work cleanly (I'm a little
>uncomfortable with dropping in a radically different implementation of the same class
>name, defining a Category-esque interface would seem to be better), but I think
>something like the build Ceki put together is probably good enough to start with.
>
>Has anyone brought this up on the log4j lists?
No, but you are welcome to bring it up.
--
Ceki G�lc� - http://qos.ch
