> One more dumb question for you. If you're so smart, where did I find the > set up for the fatal log? And why?
I would have had to agree with Bender's statement that logging with no appenders makes the logging go nowhere, and I put together a test case to make sure: the program: import org.apache.log4j.Logger; public class TestNoAppenders { public static void main (String[] args) { System.setProperty("log4j.debug", "true"); System.setProperty("log4j.configuration", "file:log4j-noappender.xml"); Logger logger = Logger.getLogger("foo"); logger.info("hello"); } } the configuration: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> <!DOCTYPE log4j:configuration SYSTEM "log4j.dtd"> <log4j:configuration xmlns:log4j="http://jakarta.apache.org/log4j/" debug= "true"> <root> <priority value="INFO" /> </root> </log4j:configuration> The output to stdout/stderr: log4j: Using URL [file:log4j-noappender.xml] for automatic log4j configuration. log4j: Preferred configurator class: org.apache.log4j.xml.DOMConfigurator log4j: System property is :null log4j: Standard DocumentBuilderFactory search succeded. log4j: DocumentBuilderFactory is: org.apache.crimson.jaxp.DocumentBuilderFactoryImpl log4j: debug attribute= "true". log4j: reset attribute= "false". log4j: Threshold ="null". log4j: Level value for root is [INFO]. log4j: root level set to INFO log4j:WARN No appenders could be found for logger (foo). log4j:WARN Please initialize the log4j system properly. which is exactly what experience has lead me to expect (I have seen the last two lines about a bajillion times in my life...), and Bender's statement is quite accurate for the information given... so now my curiousity is up: where *did* you find your output? if it showed up anywhere, I would be inclined to think that a different configuration was getting picked up...