There has to be a way for us to generate JDK 1.1 compatible code. I thought that was what the src and target attributes were doing in the ant javac task.
-Mark > -----Original Message----- > From: Curt Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 4:48 PM > To: Log4J Developers List > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release log4j 1.2.12rc3 > > Things are not ideal when trying to run log4j 1.2.12 on JDK 1.2 or > 1.1 and not at all happy when trying to build it there. Later javac > compilers should produce bytecode compatible with earlier JVM's, but > when attempting to run log4j on JDK 1.1 or JDK 1.2, you will likely > get a warning like: > > > "A nonfatal internal > > JIT (3.00.72b(x)) error 'chgTar: Conditional' has occurred in org/ > > apache/logj4/Hierarchy.getLogger()..." > > However the application appears to function tolerably. > > If you attempt to build log4j with Ant 1.5.4 or later (current is > 1.6.5) on JDK 1.2, you will also get the same message but the build > will stall. Ant 1.5 did not have that problem. I didn't check > 1.5.1, .2 or .3. > > JDK 1.2 and earlier compilers had problems with "final" member > variables requiring them to be set at declaration instead of > accepting them being set in the constructor. > org.apache.log4j.chainsaw.LoggingReciever will fail to compile with > early javac due to this compiler bug and could be modified to work > around the compiler bug. > > Building log4j on JDK 1.2 requires a jar containing the JNDI API > (javax.naming.Context, etc). JNDI got bundled into JDK 1.3, but a > quick search did not come up with a jar for JDK 1.2. > > All these issues should also exist for log4j 1.2.11, but there have > been no complaints about use of log4j 1.2.11 on older platforms, so > it appears that the universe of users tracking our current releases > are not running on older platforms. > > I think going back in time and trying to find a JDK 1.2 compatible > version of Ant, etc, is too destabilizing and not consistent with our > RC's and 1.2.11. > > I'd be +1 for proceeding with a candidate build as long as we add a > proviso that running log4j 1.2.12 on JDK 1.2 or 1.1 is not > recommended/tested/supported or something that would hopefully > discourage someone from just dropping in log4j 1.2.12 into a mission > critical JDK 1.1 or 1.2 application. > > I have not confirmed that everything is satisfactory on JDK 1.3, but > will before voting on a release. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
