There are 2 issues with build log4j 1 IIRC: Getting the Java part to build
and getting the C DLL to build. Both require old stuff laying around in
just the right places.

Gary
On Jul 14, 2016 9:02 AM, "Ralph Goers" <[email protected]> wrote:

That would rule out building on a Mac.  I’d have to try it from a Linux
VM.  I think Gary might have built Log4j 1 in the past.

Ralph

On Jul 14, 2016, at 8:52 AM, Paul Benedict <[email protected]> wrote:

Matt, I guess you need JDK 1.4.2 on your machine to have artifact
"sun.jdk:tools:jar:1.4.2".

Cheers,
Paul

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:

> How do you even build log4j 1.2? I get this error when I build from trunk:
>
> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2:run (javadoc.resources) on
> project log4j: Execution javadoc.resources of goal
> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2:run failed: Plugin
> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2 or one of its dependencies
> could not be resolved: Could not find artifact sun.jdk:tools:jar:1.4.2 at
> specified path
> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_66.jdk/Contents/Home/jre/../Classes/classes.jar
> -> [Help 1]
>
> On 14 July 2016 at 10:47, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Why would we want to do that? We need to make sure that Log4j 2 works
>> well with Java 9, but otherwise I think this is an excellent opportunity
>> for users to upgrade to Log4j 2.
>>
>> Remko
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Paul Benedict <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> According to this poster, it appears 1.x is not compatible with JDK 9:
>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2016-July/008654.html
>>>
>>> I told them I would notify our development community. So here's the
>>> notification. :-)
>>>
>>> Given how widely used 1.x is still, what do you guys think of one more
>>> 1.x release? Usually I would never entertain the suggestion, but this may
>>> be the one time the justification makes sense. For those who still use 1.x
>>> and have no time to upgrade to 2.x, I can't think of a better way to
>>> support the user community than fix this issue.
>>>
>>> PS: Inside the post is a link to the supposed patch.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Paul
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>

Reply via email to