This does beg the question that one of the original design goals of
log4j 1.3 was that it's minimum requirement would be JDK 1.2. Are we
still all in favour of that? I would like to think that JDK 1.3
would be an acceptable minimum in this day and age?
Paul
On 16/08/2005, at 9:47 AM, Curt Arnold wrote:
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]
