Scott,
The ExpressionFilter&LogFilePatternReceiver/ORO dependency is related but quite distinct from the problem discovered by Curt. As I was expecting a different approach, I was surprised and a little confused by the changes in your latest commit to build.xml. Your changes are certainly not intrusive from the perspective of the "log4j.jar" target. However, I don't think it does justice to the o.a.l.rules package. We should revisit the issue of adding the rules package to log4j.jar and its ORO dependency at a later juncture, after things calm down.
How does that sound to you?
At 05:20 PM 12/16/2004, Scott Deboy wrote:
I'm -1 on reverting.
The question is if the chainsaw jar target should be skipped if ORO is missing.
ORO's presence is not -critical- in Chainsaw's case. If it were, I would agree with the revert (I wouldn't have made the commit).
If the ORO jar is not available when Chainsaw is running (and now compiling the target, after last night's commit), everything works fine - the only feature missing is the 'LIKE' rule in expressions.
Again, the expression syntax and rule package were designed to provide functionality in Chainsaw, but are useful outside of Chainsaw (ExpressionFilter).
I can't see a reason why folks wouldn't want to download ORO and use it, but the lack of ORO support will not prevent Chainsaw from working.
My most recent commit to LogFactory also allows folks to write their own LikeRule using JDK1.4's java.util.regex package if they wanted.
Scott
-- Ceki G�lc�
The complete log4j manual: http://qos.ch/log4j/
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
