> One more dumb question for you. If you're so smart, where did I find
the
> set up for the fatal log? And why?
I would have had to agree with Bender's statement that logging with no
appenders makes the logging go nowhere, and I put together a test case to
make sure:
the program:
import org.apache.log4j.Logger;
public class TestNoAppenders {
public static void main (String[] args) {
System.setProperty("log4j.debug", "true");
System.setProperty("log4j.configuration",
"file:log4j-noappender.xml");
Logger logger = Logger.getLogger("foo");
logger.info("hello");
}
}
the configuration:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE log4j:configuration SYSTEM "log4j.dtd">
<log4j:configuration xmlns:log4j="http://jakarta.apache.org/log4j/"; debug=
"true">
<root>
<priority value="INFO" />
</root>
</log4j:configuration>
The output to stdout/stderr:
log4j: Using URL [file:log4j-noappender.xml] for automatic log4j
configuration.
log4j: Preferred configurator class: org.apache.log4j.xml.DOMConfigurator
log4j: System property is :null
log4j: Standard DocumentBuilderFactory search succeded.
log4j: DocumentBuilderFactory is:
org.apache.crimson.jaxp.DocumentBuilderFactoryImpl
log4j: debug attribute= "true".
log4j: reset attribute= "false".
log4j: Threshold ="null".
log4j: Level value for root is [INFO].
log4j: root level set to INFO
log4j:WARN No appenders could be found for logger (foo).
log4j:WARN Please initialize the log4j system properly.
which is exactly what experience has lead me to expect (I have seen the
last two lines about a bajillion times in my life...), and Bender's
statement is quite accurate for the information given...
so now my curiousity is up: where *did* you find your output? if it showed
up anywhere, I would be inclined to think that a different configuration
was getting picked up...
