Isn't it though a separate bundle (pax-logging-service vs.
pax-logging-logback)? From looking at the code it looks like whilst it uses
the same pid as the pax-logging-service, pax-logging-logback works a little
differently (the org.ops4j.pax.logging configuration contains a pointer to
the real
I suppose people find the enhanced log4j version sufficient.
A bunch of sutff has been added to the basic log4j embedded in paxlogging,
such as MDCSiftingAPpender, ZipROllingFileAppender, MDCMatchFilter and
missing property based configuration for hierachical bits.
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 4:10
Another drawback of switching to logback would be that the log:set command
which allow changing the logger levels would not work anymore.
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Achim Nierbeck bcanh...@googlemail.comwrote:
No not really, cause right now we rather use the ConfigurationAdmin
Service
FYI, I tried the pax-logging-logback library (not sure if it was 1.7.0 or
1.7.1 or something), but it went crazy when I installed it. Literally just
about every bundle version of logback that was ever made ended up installed
and activated there were some other weird things. I ended up
Hi Ryan,
I am curious - How did you install it?
thanks,
Gareth
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Ryan Moquin [via Karaf]
ml-node+s922171n4028206...@n3.nabble.com wrote:
FYI, I tried the pax-logging-logback library (not sure if it was 1.7.0 or
1.7.1 or something), but it went crazy when I
Hm let me remember. I think I included it as a maven dependency on my
bundles and it was installed from the generated feature file. It was a few
months back so I forget all the details. I wasn't really sure what the
underlying issue was and if maybe it was a first version of it and had a
