On Mon, 2013-12-23 at 18:03 -0800, Mike Schilli wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013, Dave Pointon wrote:
>
> > Would it be worthwhile to document this 'feature' in order to head off
> > further such questions?
>
> Gah, wrong link :). I added this item to the FAQ:
>
>
> https://github.com/mschilli
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013, Dave Pointon wrote:
> Would it be worthwhile to document this 'feature' in order to head off
> further such questions?
Gah, wrong link :). I added this item to the FAQ:
https://github.com/mschilli/log4perl/commit/18c615ec1c81d780faeff8b95f49494ad29dbcfa
Good enough?
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013, Dave Pointon wrote:
> Would it be worthwhile to document this 'feature' in order to head off
> further such questions?
I added this to the FAQ:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/FatwalletHotDeals/~3/YyseBpP9ZeU/
Good enough?
-- -- Mike
Mike Schilli
m...@perlmeister.com
Hiya Mike ,
On Sat, 2013-12-21 at 14:21 -0800, Mike Schilli wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Hope that helps!
>
Awesome, that's most definitely worth the wait.
Would it be worthwhile to document this 'feature' in order to head off
further such questions?
Thanx for that ,
Best rgds ,
--
Dave Pointon
Hi Dave,
you're defining different loggers, but what you really want is define
different appenders attached to a single logger.
A logger has a category ("" or "main" or "Foo::Bar"), which determines
which package namespace to accept messages from, and a set of appenders
which it forwards the mess
Hi gents ,
I think that I'm experiencing some unexpected behaviour when using
easy_init() with multiple logger definitions (as suggested in the
perldoc), viz ... the reporting level is apparently determined by the
last of the definitions c/w being individually applicable e.g.
With the call
Log:
