DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24159.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Kevin,
Thank you for your comments. This problem has been discussed before. Please sse
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=11015036401r=1w=2
In short, we'd very much like to add this feature but fear that it cannot
be done do reliably.
At 01:19 AM 12/20/2004, Kevin A. Burton wrote:
I just
ceki2004/12/20 03:10:16
Modified:src/java/org/apache/log4j LogManager.java
Log:
Unsafe feature.
Revision ChangesPath
1.29 +0 -10 logging-log4j/src/java/org/apache/log4j/LogManager.java
Index: LogManager.java
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32722.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
At 12:55 AM 12/19/2004, Curt Arnold wrote:
Thanks, I think. What a strange and unusual Christmas gift.
You are the one who is making the gift.
There are several bugs that I have previously reported, please let me know
if anyone has any objects to my proceeding to address them. The bugs are:
At 12:55 AM 12/19/2004, Curt Arnold wrote:
CachedDateFormat is pretty interesting. However, I suspect that it may
not work properly in case the data format passed by the user causes
the length of the returned data to change over time. For example, if
the format is '-M-dd HH:mm:ss' and the
At 12:55 AM 12/19/2004, Curt Arnold wrote:
Thanks, I think. What a strange and unusual Christmas gift.
You are the one who is making the gift.
There are several bugs that I have previously reported, please let me know
if anyone has any objects to my proceeding to address them. The bugs are:
On Dec 20, 2004, at 8:33 AM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
CachedDateFormat is pretty interesting. However, I suspect that it may
not work properly in case the data format passed by the user causes
the length of the returned data to change over time. For example, if
the format is '-M-dd HH:mm:ss' and
Hello,
Indeed, testing the automatic logger naming feature will be quite hard
to test on all platforms. Not only that, the behavior of a particular
JVM may vary between the test environment and the environment of a
real-world application. So no amount of brute-force (automated)
testing
To help wrap this up, would you mind providing a little history into the
conversations that took place when LocationInfo was first added?
I assume the same issue was discussed - LocationInfo's lack of reliability
versus its benefit to the end user. That conversation must have tipped in
favor
LocationInfo is allowed to fail in extracting caller information while
Logger.getLogger(...) must always succeed. If LocationInfo fails you
either get incorrect location information or just '?' for the %M, %C,
%L, %F pattern converters. If Logger.getLogger() fails then the whole
named hierarchy
At 08:22 PM 12/20/2004, Curt Arnold wrote:
On Dec 20, 2004, at 8:48 AM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
I still owe the list an iteration on an XML schema for the
http://logging.apache.org namespace. I assume that I should file a bug
report on this when ready. Any suggestions on the appropriate location
carnold 2004/12/20 17:24:10
Modified:src/java/org/apache/log4j/net TelnetAppender.java
testsperformance.xml
Added: tests/input/performance telnet.xml
Log:
Bug 22368: TelnetAppender should check for connections before rendering
message
Revision
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
carnold 2004/12/20 17:49:25
Modified:src/java/org/apache/log4j/net TelnetAppender.java
Log:
Bug 22369: TelnetAppender removes elements while iterating
Revision ChangesPath
1.11 +13 -8
logging-log4j/src/java/org/apache/log4j/net/TelnetAppender.java
Index:
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32064.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
16 matches
Mail list logo