On Nov 14, 2011, at 11:16 PM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
> Can you tell me:
>
> 1. What logging backend are you using? (log4j?)
yes, log4j, see below
slf4jVersion = "1.6.1"
// logging for testing
slf4j_api: 'org.slf4j:slf4j-api:' + slf4jVersion,
slf4j_log4j12: 'org.slf4j:slf4j-log4j12:' + slf4jVersion,
jcl_slf4j: 'org.slf4j:jcl-over-slf4j:' + slf4jVersion,
jcl_api:
'commons-logging:commons-logging-api:99.0-does-not-exist',
jcl: 'commons-logging:commons-logging:99.0-does-not-exist',
> 2. Are the file/line numbers correct?
>
file is correct, but line numbers are not
> Thanks. My suspicion is that it's a (well, another) problem in the log4j
> backend.
>
> On 11/14/2011 03:30 AM, Strong Liu wrote:
>> after pull all changes, I get a logging issue :(
>>
>> if i run a test in IDE (IntelliJ), the log output are all like this:
>>
>> 17:20:31,767 DEBUG AbstractEntityPersister:576 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>> 17:20:31,768 DEBUG AbstractEntityPersister:576 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>> 17:20:31,768 DEBUG AbstractEntityPersister:576 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>> 17:20:31,768 DEBUG AbstractEntityPersister:581 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>> 17:20:31,768 DEBUG AbstractEntityPersister:581 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>> 17:20:31,769 DEBUG AbstractEntityPersister:581 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>> 17:20:31,769 DEBUG AbstractCollectionPersister:576 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>> 17:20:31,769 DEBUG AbstractCollectionPersister:576 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>> 17:20:31,769 DEBUG AbstractCollectionPersister:576 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>> 17:20:31,770 DEBUG AbstractCollectionPersister:576 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>> 17:20:31,770 DEBUG AbstractCollectionPersister:576 -
>> org.hibernate.internal.CoreMessageLogger_$logger
>>
>>
>> but it is fine if I run it from command line
>>
>> p.s. I have updated to the latest source and 'gradle cleanIdea idea
>> clean test', so the dependencies in IDE are update-to-date and the
>> generated source as well
>>
>> any idea or am i missing some configuration here?
>>
>> -------------------------
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Strong Liu <stliu at hibernate.org <http://hibernate.org>>
>> http://about.me/stliu/bio
>>
>> On Nov 10, 2011, at 5:35 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>>
>>> Awesome!
>>> just verified on both Hibernate Search and Infinispan, no issues spotted !
>>>
>>> thanks a lot,
>>> Sanne
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9 November 2011 21:29, Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org
>>> <mailto:st...@hibernate.org>> wrote:
>>>> Chill out man :)
>>>>
>>>> Just making sure everyone know the ramifications and intentions.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed 09 Nov 2011 02:43:43 PM CST, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>>>>> Yup, that's correct. And yeah #3 is optional which is why I said "may".
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/09/2011 02:38 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks David!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just to make sure I understand. Doing the steps above will allow the
>>>>>> built artifact to run in either AS 7.0 or 7.1. Correct?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought we had said on IRC that Hibernate could really get away with
>>>>>> (1) and (2) and that JBoss AS 7.0 could specify to use JBoss
>>>>>> Logging 3.0
>>>>>> via dep-mgmt in its pom(s) rather than allowing Hibernate (or
>>>>>> others) to
>>>>>> pull in Logging 3.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed 09 Nov 2011 02:32:11 PM CST, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>>>>>>> OK folks. I've pushed out jboss-logging 3.1.0.CR1 and
>>>>>>> jboss-logging-tools 1.0.0.CR4.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here's what you need to do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 0. Update your dep versions (obviously)
>>>>>>> 1. Add the following switch to your annotation processing step (or to
>>>>>>> javac if it's combined): -AloggingVersion=3.0
>>>>>>> 2. Build your artifacts against jboss-logging 3.1.0.CR1.
>>>>>>> 3. When you publish the POMs for artifacts built this way, you may
>>>>>>> specify jboss-logging 3.0.0.GA as the required version, and it will be
>>>>>>> compatible with such.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Basically what you're doing with the -AloggingVersion=3.0 flag is
>>>>>>> generating larger classes in exchange for backwards compatibility. If
>>>>>>> you develop other frameworks which are not expected to be supported on
>>>>>>> AS 7.0 (for example), you do not need this flag (logging version 3.1
>>>>>>> is required in this case).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If this doesn't solve your issues please let me know right away.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/09/2011 08:47 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>>>>>>>> Yeah, the problem was that to *implement* BasicLogger we had
>>>>>>>> switched to
>>>>>>>> using a base class (bundled in 3.1) to implement the multitude of
>>>>>>>> methods, due to problems associated with generating all the
>>>>>>>> implementations in every class.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 11/09/2011 08:39 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Ok, I am totally confused then. I thought this was a discussion
>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>> BasicLogger. But we have been using that afaik way before our recent
>>>>>>>>> upgrade to 3.1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed 09 Nov 2011 08:23:33 AM CST, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/09/2011 08:22 AM, Hardy Ferentschik wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 15:00:07 +0100, Steve Ebersole
>>>>>>>>>>> <st...@hibernate.org <mailto:st...@hibernate.org>>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe instead of "shading in" the removed class you could just
>>>>>>>>>>>> add it
>>>>>>>>>>>> back to the JBoss Logging codebase?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Right, why can we not do that?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You have it backwards. We didn't *remove* a class, we *added* one -
>>>>>>>>>> which makes it not present in 3.0.x.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/09/2011 04:48 AM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see a few outputs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - JBoss Logging 3.1.0.Final is released in the next 24h and we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> use it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Core and Search
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What's stopping a 3.1.0.Final release?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Trying to resolve this issue for you guys.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> st...@hibernate.org <mailto:st...@hibernate.org>
>>>> http://hibernate.org
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>>>> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>>> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>
>
>
> --
> - DML
_______________________________________________
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
