Yeah, that's the general point of pax-logging. It provides all the various logger APIs to export to other packages, and internally they all route to a common pax-logging log4j 1.x or 2.x config. Other bundles don't need to do anything different than using Loggers as they would normally.
On 10 August 2016 at 08:58, <[email protected]> wrote: > Resending: The message apparently didn't reach the list the first time > around. > > Hello! > > I've recently stumbled across the pax-logging project and am curious if > it is able to support the following slightly convoluted deployment > configuration. > > The relevant points are: > > * The OSGi container is embedded within an application that already > has its own SLF4J logging. I don't care which backend is used (it's > currently logback-classic, but I don't mind switching to log4j if > necessary). > > * The OSGi container contains a mix of code that is both OSGi-aware > and OSGI-unaware. That is, some of the code uses the standard OSGi log > service, and the rest of it uses SLF4J. > > I would like to do the following, if possible: > > 1. The main application controls the SLF4J/logback/log4j configuration, > logging all messages to a rolling log appender. The main application > (the "host") doesn't do much before starting the OSGi container, but > I would still like it to be the host that's in control of logging. > > 2. Any messages generated by the OSGi framework (Felix in this case, > but I don't think it matters which I use) should go to the host's > SLF4J logging configuration. > > 3. Any messages logged by code running inside the OSGi container that's > using the OSGi log service should go to the host's SLF4J logging > configuration. > > 4. Any messages logged by code inside the OSGi container that's using > SLF4J should to the host's SLF4J logging configuration. > > Basically, I want to guarantee that every single log message is > captured and that all of the the messages end up at the same > destination so that I'm configuring logging in one place instead of > multiple. > > Is this doable with pax-logging? Am I likely to suffer greatly trying > to achieve it? > > Thanks, > Mark > > -- > -- > ------------------ > OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - [email protected] > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OPS4J" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]> -- -- ------------------ OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - [email protected] --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OPS4J" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
