If you've got a good idea on how to do it, sure.
On 4 May 2014 14:04, Bruce Brouwer <bruce.brou...@gmail.com> wrote: > I haven't spent much time on this since my initial attempt on 609. Shall I > leave it to Ralph to come up with the final solution, or would you like me > to try? > On May 4, 2014 2:35 PM, "Matt Sicker" <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Looks like there's nothing to synchronise on actually. Guess you can just >> cache them before the check in general. >> >> >> On 4 May 2014 13:25, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Oh phew. Well, I'll leave that to you if you wanted to continue what you >>> were working on. All I added was a check on close() to compare against the >>> current System.out and System.err. I'll take a look into OpenJDK to see how >>> to properly lock those (if possible) to prevent fun race conditions. >>> >>> >>> On 4 May 2014 13:11, Ralph Goers <rgo...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> No, it can be simpler than that. >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPad >>>> >>>> On May 4, 2014, at 10:55 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> This is starting to sound like we need a full-blown >>>> factory/context/logger implementation of StatusLogger. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 4 May 2014 12:46, Ralph Goers <rgo...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Also, that doesn't solve the case Remko mentioned of multiple web apps >>>>> writing to a single file. >>>>> >>>>> Ralph >>>>> >>>>> On May 4, 2014, at 9:53 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> So how about adding a check at construction checking against >>>>> System.out and System.err? Really, once you start messing with those >>>>> streams, you can't be sure they'll ever be closed until the JVM stops or >>>>> you manually close it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 4 May 2014 09:36, Ralph Goers <rgo...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I see two choices here - maintain a use count or just let the OS >>>>>> close the files. >>>>>> >>>>>> The second would be pretty easy to do once we move the web stuff to >>>>>> its own module as it can add a property that the console Appender would >>>>>> look for. >>>>>> >>>>>> The first option is probably better if it could be made to work >>>>>> properly. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ralph >>>>>> >>>>>> On May 4, 2014, at 6:38 AM, Bruce Brouwer <bruce.brou...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> This is what I was starting to investigate with LOG4J2-609. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think this is quite there yet. For one, in >>>>>> StatusConsoleListener.close(), System.out and System.err can change over >>>>>> time, so doing the != check might still close something that at one time >>>>>> was System.out but no longer is. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, a StatusConsoleListener is shared among different >>>>>> JSONConfiguration and XMLConfiguration instances (think about multiple >>>>>> WARs >>>>>> in a Tomcat instance where log4j is in Tomcat's shared lib directory). If >>>>>> we undeployed one of those WARs, it would shutdown the >>>>>> StatusConsoleListener that was shared with the other WAR deployments. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also think about where some of these WARs wanted to use System.out >>>>>> and others want to use a log file for status logging. Because of the way >>>>>> these shared loggers are found, only the first StatusConsoleListener >>>>>> registered would actually take effect. So sometimes when you start >>>>>> Tomcat, >>>>>> status logs go to System.out, other times they go to a log file. I'd hate >>>>>> having to debug that one if I didn't know about this issue. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have an idea of how to address this, but it unfortunately isn't as >>>>>> simple as closing the StatusConsoleListener. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hooray, we've finally figured out the bug. :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 3 May 2014 19:49, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I just updated from SVN and all tests now pass. >>>>>>>> The build works now. Thanks! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I just fixed it in r1592291 haha >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 3 May 2014 17:54, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yes. It cause them to close. Anything written to System.out or >>>>>>>>>> System.err will fail. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On May 3, 2014, at 3:51 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Does closing them do anything? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 3 May 2014 17:10, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps we need a StatusFileListerner when writing to a file? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On May 3, 2014, at 3:03 PM, Ralph Goers < >>>>>>>>>>> ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> System.out or System.err should never be closed. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On May 3, 2014, at 10:59 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I've implemented Closeable on StatusListener in r1592258. Please >>>>>>>>>>> try out the unit tests again and let me know if this solves the >>>>>>>>>>> issue on >>>>>>>>>>> Windows. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 3 May 2014 12:30, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think this is actually a bug. StatusListener should implement >>>>>>>>>>>> Closeable, and when the listeners are cleared, it should loop >>>>>>>>>>>> through and >>>>>>>>>>>> close them before clearing the list of listeners. Otherwise, files >>>>>>>>>>>> can stay >>>>>>>>>>>> opened and Windows still hasn't figured out how to handle that. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 3 May 2014 11:22, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, commenting out that test to verify my changes was >>>>>>>>>>>>> exactly what I was doing now... :-) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Ralph Goers < >>>>>>>>>>>>> ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, and if you are trying to do some work just comment out >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the @Test of the failing test - but don’t commit that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 3, 2014, at 9:19 AM, Ralph Goers < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That happens because the file is still being referenced by >>>>>>>>>>>>>> something when it is trying to delete it. It should be because >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the file is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> open but I recall reading that Windows sometimes holds on to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>> references longer than it should. This was probably caused by >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the changes >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matt made to the unit test framework a month or so ago. I will >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bring up my >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows VM and take a look at it this afternoon. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 3, 2014, at 8:58 AM, Remko Popma < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, windows 7. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Ralph Goers < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileOutputTest was failing for me last week and I thought I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed it. But it was failing because the file was empty, not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couldn’t be deleted. I guess you must be running on Windows? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 3, 2014, at 8:44 AM, Remko Popma < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > When I run mvn clean install, I get this problem: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Failed tests: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > FileOutputTest.testConfig Could not delete >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> target\status.log, last modifed 14/05/04 0:27 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > FileOutputTest has a "CleanFiles" rule that seems to fail: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > public RuleChain rules = RuleChain.outerRule(new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CleanFiles(STATUS_LOG)).around(new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> InitialLoggerContext(CONFIG)); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > How do I fix this? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Remko >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> Bruce Brouwer >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >> > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
