Not as far as I can tell. I believe it was added in Java 1.5. Thread
Information is referenced in JSR 174.
On Sep 18, 2011, at 5:32 PM, Scott Deboy wrote:
> That's optional though I believe. Oracle vm specific?
>
>>>
>>> I think
>>> http://download.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/lang/manag
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-51?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
John Vasileff updated LOG4J2-51:
Attachment: (was:
0002-fix-for-Category.getInstance-returning-cached-Logger.patch)
> ClassCastE
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-50?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
John Vasileff updated LOG4J2-50:
Attachment: 0004-cleanup-FQCN-code.patch
Comments for 0004.patch
cleanup FQCN code
Make sure all a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-50?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
John Vasileff reopened LOG4J2-50:
-
Actually, in the original report I was using log4j12-api. It was a puzzle to
determine why your test
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-51?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
John Vasileff updated LOG4J2-51:
Attachment: 0003-remove-dangerous-logger-factory-override.patch
Attaching patch #3 in the series:
r
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-51?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
John Vasileff updated LOG4J2-51:
Attachment: 0002-fix-for-Category.getInstance-returning-cached-Logger.patch
Patch to fix the problem
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-51?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
John Vasileff updated LOG4J2-51:
Attachment: 0002-fix-for-Category.getInstance-returning-cached-Logger.patch
re-attaching
> Clas
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-51?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
John Vasileff updated LOG4J2-51:
Attachment: 0001-add-test-for-Category-when-using-a-log4j2-Logger.patch
Attached test case for this
ClassCastException in Category logger
-
Key: LOG4J2-51
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-51
Project: Log4j 2
Issue Type: Bug
Components: log4j 1.2 emulation
Reporter:
That's optional though I believe. Oracle vm specific?
On Sep 18, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Ralph Goers
wrote:
On Sep 18, 2011, at 4:56 PM, Joern Huxhorn wrote:
On 19.09.2011, at 01:29, Ralph Goers wrote:
On Sep 18, 2011, at 3:01 PM, Joern Huxhorn wrote:
Sorry, I was confused and mixed so
On Sep 18, 2011, at 4:56 PM, Joern Huxhorn wrote:
>
> On 19.09.2011, at 01:29, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sep 18, 2011, at 3:01 PM, Joern Huxhorn wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry, I was confused and mixed something up...
>>>
>>> I *planned* to implement a thread-specific sequence number but never did
On 19.09.2011, at 01:29, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Sep 18, 2011, at 3:01 PM, Joern Huxhorn wrote:
>
>> Sorry, I was confused and mixed something up...
>>
>> I *planned* to implement a thread-specific sequence number but never did so.
>> I also considered logging the ThreadGroup-hierarchy but
On Sep 18, 2011, at 3:01 PM, Joern Huxhorn wrote:
> Sorry, I was confused and mixed something up...
>
> I *planned* to implement a thread-specific sequence number but never did so.
> I also considered logging the ThreadGroup-hierarchy but didn't do so, yet,
> because of the expected performanc
That looks pretty easy to do. However, I'd prefer that the stack trace also
show locks held just as the JVM stack trace does. I don't know how to do that.
Do you?
Ralph
On Sep 18, 2011, at 3:01 PM, Joern Huxhorn wrote:
> Sorry, I was confused and mixed something up...
>
> I *planned* to imple
Sorry, I was confused and mixed something up...
I *planned* to implement a thread-specific sequence number but never did so. I
also considered logging the ThreadGroup-hierarchy but didn't do so, yet,
because of the expected performance impact.
Which reminds me, completely off-topic, of another
On Sep 18, 2011, at 4:54 AM, Joern Huxhorn wrote:
>
> Well, I could give you my protobuf but I'm not sure if it makes sense to add
> it to Log4J directly.
>
> It contains more (optional) fields than Log4J will provide, partially since
> populating those fields has a performance impact. JUL ha
Chainsaw does a similar thing by adding event properties when the
event is received. It does this regardless of which Receiver received
the event.
On Sep 18, 2011, at 4:54 AM, Joern Huxhorn
wrote:
On 17.09.2011, at 23:42, Ralph Goers wrote:
On Sep 17, 2011, at 1:43 PM, Joern Huxhor
On 17.09.2011, at 23:42, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Sep 17, 2011, at 1:43 PM, Joern Huxhorn wrote:
>
>>
>> On 17.09.2011, at 21:26, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 17, 2011, at 11:40 AM, Joern Huxhorn wrote:
>>>
On 17.09.2011, at 18:47, John Vasileff wrote:
>
>
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at gene...@gump.apache.org.
Project logging-log4j-receivers has an issue affecting its community
integration.
20 matches
Mail list logo
