With the exception of the remote deployer, we don't rely on JMX. The
remote deployer uses JMX remoting to connect to the Geronimo
deployment service. Assuming that works, we should be ok using what
the vm ships.
-dain
On Feb 27, 2007, at 1:27 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
Good point... we should start ripping that stuff out, probably save
a wee bit of space in the assembly.
Though... by doing so we are at the mercy of the JVM to provide a
JMX system that doesn't suck ass (horrible bugs, etc).
--jason
On Feb 27, 2007, at 12:51 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
We don't need mx4j in 2.0 since jmx is in the vm starting with Java5.
-dain
On Feb 26, 2007, at 7:02 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
Anyone know if we can replace these bits in
GeronimoLogging.initialize()
<snip>
try {
Class clazz = Class.forName("mx4j.log.Log");
Class paramClazz = Class.forName("mx4j.log.Logger");
Method method = clazz.getDeclaredMethod("redirectTo", new
Class[] {paramClazz});
paramClazz = Class.forName("mx4j.log.CommonsLogger");
method.invoke(null, new Object[] {paramClazz.newInstance()});
} catch (ClassNotFoundException e) {
// MX4J is not present.
} catch (Exception e) {
throw (AssertionError) new AssertionError("Cannot force MX4J
to use commons logging.").initCause(e);
}
</snip>
With:
<snip>
System.setProperty("mx4j.log.prototype", "mx4j.log.CommonsLogger");
</snip>
--jason
