log4cpp-devel — technical discussions about the development of log4cpp

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] Release 1.0

[Scott C. <can...@os...>]

> Please try it out and have a look if things ok with this release.

In short, no. I'm getting a lot of errors on Windows with VC6 so far.
Haven't tried VC8 yet. I'd suggest pulling this release for the time being
until ever supported platform checks clean.

> I have only checked (and created) the release under the gentoo system.
> Hope it can be used also on all the other platforms we support.

If we need volunteers to maintain the other platforms, then that's fine, but
we probably should have a process to sign off on releases so that each
tester has a chance to report in. I didn't try Windows because I assumed
that was being tested by the maintainers, so I was focusing on Solaris and
OS X.

I'll provide the Windows fixes as soon as I get it to build.

-- Scott

[Log4cpp-devel] Release 1.0

[waffel <wa...@ho...>]

I have very nice news!

Our 1.0 release is out and available for download on the sourceforge 
site 
(https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=15190&package_id=244425). 


Please try it out and have a look if things ok with this release.

At this point many thanks to all developers and users which have made 
this release available!

Hopfully we can gat some more feature to the library and anybody can 
have a look over the testcases.

I have only checked (and created) the release under the gentoo system. 
Hope it can be used also on all the other platforms we support.

Next we should have a look over all the open bugs in from the SF 
bugtracker and close (or) them.

For everybody who is interested about the code history and other 
informations about the project: Have a look at 
http://www.ohloh.net/projects/3598?p=log4cpp

Regards,

- waffel

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] Solaris 10 fixes

[Konstantin L. <1da...@ma...>]

Hello, Scott!
You wrote to <log...@li...> on Fri, 24 Aug 2007 
00:49:03 -0400:

SC> See diff below. There was one error (strict C++ doesn't permit
SC> assignment of non-const iterators to const iterators), one warning I
SC> fixed with a using import, and one bug I didn't really know what to do
SC> with.

SC> CategoryStream is declaring eol twice, once as an enum and once as a
SC> function. For the build, I just renamed the enum, but I'll leave the
SC> final fix to the maintainers.

SC> Once this is all fixed, I'll test OS X.

    Please, test it. I think I have fixed all issues.

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] release stopper

[Konstantin L. <1da...@ma...>]

Hello, Thomas!
You wrote to <log...@li...> on Mon, 27 Aug 2007 
12:41:17 +0200:

TW> currently I cannot create our 1.0 release because I have one test case
TW> which fails. Evtl. can anybody help me here?

TW> Under my linux (gentoo) the testPattern test fails with following
TW> error message:

TW> PASS: testNDC
TW> % 1 cat1:2007-08-27 12:25:15,780 (1188210315 / 1) [ERROR] ndc1 message
TW> % (30000)
??>>   message<
??>> message   <
TW> terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::length_error'
TW>    what():  basic_string::_S_create
TW> /bin/sh: line 4: 23799 Aborted                 ${dir}$tst
TW> FAIL: testPattern

TW> Seems that the ConfigureFailure Exception is not used correct.
    Nope :). It was the bug in FormatModifierComponent. Fixed.

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] release stopper

[Konstantin L. <1da...@ma...>]

Hello, Thomas!
You wrote to <log...@li...> on Mon, 27 Aug 2007 
14:46:52 +0200:

 TW> from my point of view, there are no objections about removing
 TW> CategoryStream end of line enum. So let us clean up this.

    Done.

 TW> Thanks for your helping hands ;-)

    You are welcome ;-)

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] release stopper

[Thomas W. <wa...@ho...>]

Hi Konstantin,

from my point of view, there are no objections about removing =20
CategoryStream end of line enum. So let us clean up this.

Thanks for your helping hands ;-)

- waffel

Quoting Konstantin Litvinenko <Kon...@ma...>:

> Hello, Thomas!
> You wrote to <log...@li...> on Mon, 27 Aug 2007
> 12:41:17 +0200:
>
>  TW> currently I cannot create our 1.0 release because I have one test cas=
e
>  TW> which fails. Evtl. can anybody help me here?
>
>  TW> Under my linux (gentoo) the testPattern test fails with following
>  TW> error message:
>
>  TW> PASS: testNDC
>  TW> % 1 cat1:2007-08-27 12:25:15,780 (1188210315 / 1) [ERROR] ndc1 messag=
e
>  TW> % (30000)
>  ??>>   message<
>  ??>> message   <
>  TW> terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::length_error'
>  TW>    what():  basic_string::_S_create
>  TW> /bin/sh: line 4: 23799 Aborted                 ${dir}$tst
>  TW> FAIL: testPattern
>
>  TW> Seems that the ConfigureFailure Exception is not used correct.
>
>  TW> Hope we can fix this to create the relaese.
>
> I will look on it today.
> Is there any objections about removing CategoryStream end of line enum?
> Without it Solaris 10 build will be broken.
>
> With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Log4cpp-devel mailing list
> Log...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/log4cpp-devel
>

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] release stopper

[Konstantin L. <Kon...@ma...>]

Hello, Thomas!
You wrote to <log...@li...> on Mon, 27 Aug 2007 
12:41:17 +0200:

 TW> currently I cannot create our 1.0 release because I have one test case
 TW> which fails. Evtl. can anybody help me here?

 TW> Under my linux (gentoo) the testPattern test fails with following
 TW> error message:

 TW> PASS: testNDC
 TW> % 1 cat1:2007-08-27 12:25:15,780 (1188210315 / 1) [ERROR] ndc1 message
 TW> % (30000)
 ??>>   message<
 ??>> message   <
 TW> terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::length_error'
 TW>    what():  basic_string::_S_create
 TW> /bin/sh: line 4: 23799 Aborted                 ${dir}$tst
 TW> FAIL: testPattern

 TW> Seems that the ConfigureFailure Exception is not used correct.

 TW> Hope we can fix this to create the relaese.

I will look on it today.
Is there any objections about removing CategoryStream end of line enum? 
Without it Solaris 10 build will be broken.

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

[Log4cpp-devel] release stopper

[Thomas W. <wa...@ho...>]

Hi,

currently I cannot create our 1.0 release because I have one test case  
which fails. Evtl. can anybody help me here?

Under my linux (gentoo) the testPattern test fails with following  
error message:

PASS: testNDC
% 1 cat1:2007-08-27 12:25:15,780 (1188210315 / 1) [ERROR] ndc1 message  
% (30000)
>   message<
> message   <
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::length_error'
   what():  basic_string::_S_create
/bin/sh: line 4: 23799 Aborted                 ${dir}$tst
FAIL: testPattern

Seems that the ConfigureFailure Exception is not used correct.

Hope we can fix this to create the relaese.

Regards,

- waffel

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] CategoryStream::ENDLINE enum

[Gary G. <gr...@uc...>]

Konstantin Litvinenko wrote:
> Hello All!
> 
>     Scott Cantor has pointed out problem with CategoryStream::eol enum 
> member and free function eol on Solaris. Looking on the code I can see FOUR 
> enumeration members for end of line 'separators'. In the same time we have 
> std-like manipulators for CategoryStream. I don't see reasons why we need 
> two different way to do one thing. Can we just remove this enum in favour of 
> std-like manipulators?

I think it's ok to remove the enum, or at least the 'eol' enum, if
that's really what is causing the problem.  It's at the very least
confusing that CategoryStream right now has two eol symbols.  Would
CategoryStream::eol refer to the manipulator or the enum?  If the
Separator enum is removed, we will need to fix some of our code.  That's
ok, though, because I agree that using the manipulators exclusively
would be more consistent and more standard, plus they would be more
extensible later on.

gary

[Log4cpp-devel] CategoryStream::ENDLINE enum

[Konstantin L. <1da...@ma...>]

Hello All!

    Scott Cantor has pointed out problem with CategoryStream::eol enum 
member and free function eol on Solaris. Looking on the code I can see FOUR 
enumeration members for end of line 'separators'. In the same time we have 
std-like manipulators for CategoryStream. I don't see reasons why we need 
two different way to do one thing. Can we just remove this enum in favour of 
std-like manipulators?

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] Solaris 10 fixes

[Konstantin L. <1da...@ma...>]

Hello, Scott!
You wrote to <log...@li...> on Fri, 24 Aug 2007 
00:49:03 -0400:

 SC> See diff below. There was one error (strict C++ doesn't permit
 SC> assignment of non-const iterators to const iterators),

    It is not true. According to 23.1/5 Table 65 X::iterator must be 
convertible to X::const_iterator. Also 24.4.1.3.1/2 reverse_iterator has 
templated constructor to allow reverse_iterator<X::iterator> to be converted 
to reverse_iterator<X::const_iterator>. But seams Solaris CC or STL 
implementation is broken in this place.

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] Solaris 10 fixes

[Konstantin L. <1da...@ma...>]

Hello, Scott!
You wrote to "'Konstantin Litvinenko'" <1da...@ma...>; 
<log...@li...> on Fri, 24 Aug 2007 03:03:45 -0400:

SC> Here are the next round of packaging cleanups. I added two missing
SC> headers to the makefiles, and revised log4cpp.spec.in using a process
SC> I'm trying on several libraries. I'm making them work on Solaris, which
SC> reveals a lot of hidden Linux assumptions and missing macros in the
SC> specfile, and verifies that it will work without gcc/g++ and when
SC> installed to a different root.

SC> This specfile was in good shape, I just fixed a few small issues.

SC> The side effect is that you can actually install it as an RPM on
SC> Solaris using the Sun supplied rpm port.

    Fixed.

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] Solaris 10 fixes

[Scott C. <can...@os...>]

> This is strange. Fix is seams OK. Anyway, I have looked on this and I
> can say that ownsAppender is broken in this context. To work as intended
> this function must be virtual. So I will fix it.

Usually "using" works for me when there's a single function override
signature, but there were overloads here, so I probably could qualify it,
but whatever.

Here are the next round of packaging cleanups. I added two missing headers
to the makefiles, and revised log4cpp.spec.in using a process I'm trying on
several libraries. I'm making them work on Solaris, which reveals a lot of
hidden Linux assumptions and missing macros in the specfile, and verifies
that it will work without gcc/g++ and when installed to a different root.

This specfile was in good shape, I just fixed a few small issues.

The side effect is that you can actually install it as an RPM on Solaris
using the Sun supplied rpm port.

-- Scott

Index: include/log4cpp/Makefile.am
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/log4cpp/log4cpp/include/log4cpp/Makefile.am,v
retrieving revision 1.40
diff -r1.40 Makefile.am
45a46
>       convenience.h \

Index: src/Makefile.am
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/log4cpp/log4cpp/src/Makefile.am,v
retrieving revision 1.36
diff -r1.36 Makefile.am
5c5
< noinst_HEADERS = snprintf.c
---
> noinst_HEADERS = snprintf.c Localtime.hh

Index: log4cpp.spec.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/log4cpp/log4cpp/log4cpp.spec.in,v
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -r1.12 log4cpp.spec.in
12c12
< Copyright: LGPL
---
> License: LGPL
41a42
> %{!?_without_doxygenrpm:BuildRequires: doxygen}
48c49
< rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
---
> %{__rm} -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
51c52
< CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" ./configure --prefix=%{prefix} --enable-doxygen 
---
> CC=%{__cc} CXX=%{__cxx} ./configure --prefix=%{prefix} --enable-doxygen 
54c55
< make
---
> %{__make}
57c58
< rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
---
> %{__rm} -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
59c60
< make prefix=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix} docdir=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{manualdir}
install
---
> %{__make} prefix=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}
docdir=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{manualdir} install
61c62
< rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
---
> %{__rm} -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
63,64c64,66
< %post
< /sbin/ldconfig
---
> %ifnos solaris2.8 solaris2.9 solaris2.10
> %post -p /sbin/ldconfig
> %endif
68,69c70,71
<     perl -pi -e "s|^libdir='[^\']*'|libdir='$RPM_INSTALL_PREFIX0/lib'|"
$RPM_INSTALL_PREFIX0/lib/liblog4cpp.la
<     perl -pi -e "s|^prefix=\"[^\"]*\"|prefix=\"$RPM_INSTALL_PREFIX0\"|"
$RPM_INSTALL_PREFIX0/bin/log4cpp-config
---
>     %{__perl} -pi -e
"s|^libdir='[^\']*'|libdir='$RPM_INSTALL_PREFIX0/lib'|"
$RPM_INSTALL_PREFIX0/lib/liblog4cpp.la
>     %{__perl} -pi -e
"s|^prefix=\"[^\"]*\"|prefix=\"$RPM_INSTALL_PREFIX0\"|"
$RPM_INSTALL_PREFIX0/bin/log4cpp-config
71,73c73,76
<  
< %postun
< /sbin/ldconfig
---
> 
> %ifnos solaris2.8 solaris2.9 solaris2.10 
> %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
> %endif

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] Solaris 10 fixes

[Konstantin L. <1da...@ma...>]

Hello, Scott!
You wrote to <log...@li...> on Fri, 24 Aug 2007 
02:21:30 -0400:

??>> Index: include/log4cpp/FixedContextCategory.hh
??>> ===================================================================
??>> RCS file:
??>> /cvsroot/log4cpp/log4cpp/include/log4cpp/FixedContextCategory.hh,v
??>> retrieving revision 1.12
??>> diff -r1.12 FixedContextCategory.hh
??>> 114a115,116
??>>>         using Category::ownsAppender;

SC> Cancel that fix, for some reason it worked or seemed to the first time
SC> I rebuilt, and now it's failing, so we can leave it with the warning
SC> and forget it.

    This is strange. Fix is seams OK. Anyway, I have looked on this and I 
can say that ownsAppender is broken in this context. To work as intended 
this function must be virtual. So I will fix it.

SC> There are a number of makefile issues with headers missing from the
SC> package if I build from make dist, so I'll report the full set of fixes
SC> to that once it's working, along with some RPM spec improvements.

OK. Thanks ;)

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] Solaris 10 fixes

[Scott C. <can...@os...>]

> Index: include/log4cpp/FixedContextCategory.hh
> ===================================================================
> RCS file:
> /cvsroot/log4cpp/log4cpp/include/log4cpp/FixedContextCategory.hh,v
> retrieving revision 1.12
> diff -r1.12 FixedContextCategory.hh
> 114a115,116
> >         using Category::ownsAppender;

Cancel that fix, for some reason it worked or seemed to the first time I
rebuilt, and now it's failing, so we can leave it with the warning and
forget it.

There are a number of makefile issues with headers missing from the package
if I build from make dist, so I'll report the full set of fixes to that once
it's working, along with some RPM spec improvements.

-- Scott

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] Patch to m4 thread tests

[Konstantin L. <1da...@ma...>]

Hello, Scott!
You wrote to <log...@li...> on Fri, 24 Aug 2007 
00:33:08 -0400:

SC> I inadvertently lost a patch I made a long time back to the acx_thread
SC> macro that corrects a bug on Solaris. I thought it had been long since
SC> fixed by the macro's author, but apparently not.

SC> The cvs diff is below. Without the fix, a CC build on Solaris isn't
SC> thread-safe due to a missing -mt flag.

    Fixed.

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

[Log4cpp-devel] Solaris 10 fixes

[Scott C. <can...@os...>]

See diff below. There was one error (strict C++ doesn't permit assignment of
non-const iterators to const iterators), one warning I fixed with a using
import, and one bug I didn't really know what to do with.

CategoryStream is declaring eol twice, once as an enum and once as a
function. For the build, I just renamed the enum, but I'll leave the final
fix to the maintainers.

Once this is all fixed, I'll test OS X.

-- Scott

cvs diff: Diffing src
Index: src/BufferingAppender.cpp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/log4cpp/log4cpp/src/BufferingAppender.cpp,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -r1.1 BufferingAppender.cpp
38c38
<       for(queue_t::const_reverse_iterator i = queue_.rbegin(), last =
queue_.rend(); i != last; ++i)
---
>       for(queue_t::reverse_iterator i = queue_.rbegin(), last =
queue_.rend(); i != last; ++i)
cvs diff: Diffing include
cvs diff: Diffing include/log4cpp
Index: include/log4cpp/CategoryStream.hh
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/log4cpp/log4cpp/include/log4cpp/CategoryStream.hh,v
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -r1.11 CategoryStream.hh
40c40
<                       eol             = 0
---
>                       _eol            = 0
Index: include/log4cpp/FixedContextCategory.hh
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/log4cpp/log4cpp/include/log4cpp/FixedContextCategory.hh,v
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -r1.12 FixedContextCategory.hh
114a115,116
>         using Category::ownsAppender;
>

[Log4cpp-devel] Patch to m4 thread tests

[Scott C. <can...@os...>]

I inadvertently lost a patch I made a long time back to the acx_thread macro
that corrects a bug on Solaris. I thought it had been long since fixed by
the macro's author, but apparently not.

The cvs diff is below. Without the fix, a CC build on Solaris isn't
thread-safe due to a missing -mt flag.

I also can't get the cvs trunk to build on Solaris 10 x86 and will provide
the diffs for that once I fix the bugs.

-- Scott

cvs diff: Diffing m4
Index: m4/ACX_PTHREAD.m4
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/log4cpp/log4cpp/m4/ACX_PTHREAD.m4,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -r1.1 ACX_PTHREAD.m4
245,246c245,253
<             *-aix* | *-freebsd* | *-darwin*) flag="-D_THREAD_SAFE";;
<             *solaris* | *-osf* | *-hpux*) flag="-D_REENTRANT";;
---
>                 *-aix* | *-freebsd* | *-darwin-*) flag="-D_THREAD_SAFE";;
>                 *-osf* | *-hpux*) flag="-D_REENTRANT";;
>                 *solaris*)
>                 if test "$GCC" = "yes"; then
>                     flag="-D_REENTRANT"
>                 else
>                     flag="-mt -D_REENTRANT"
>                 fi
>                 ;;

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] short information about upcoming release

[waffel <wa...@ho...>]

Hi,

I think also, that the project is old and stable enough to use the 1.0 
as the new version number for the upcoming release.

- waffel

Bastiaan Bakker schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> log4cpp's numbering started at 0.1 to show that he first release was
> very much a work in progress. Then 0.2.x added autoconf based building
> and 0.3.x threading support. Within each 0.x branch the aim was to keep
> log4cpp backward compatible on at least API level. 
> Initially 0.2.x was designated 'stable' and 0.3.x 'development' with the
> intention to let it become a new 0.4.x 'stable'. 
> But that was some time ago (before I handed over the project to Waffel).
> So go ahead, name it version 1.0. The project is old enough to have a
> 1.0 :-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bastiaan
>
>  
>
> On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 18:59 +0300, Konstantin Litvinenko wrote:
>   
>> Hello, Scott!
>> You wrote to <log...@li...> on Wed, 22 Aug 2007 
>> 10:39:11 -0400:
>>
>>  ??>>     I think we can make new release. What version it will be? 0.3.6?
>>
>>  SC> Is there some magical criteria for 1.0? Using pre-release numbers
>>  SC> doesn't suggest a lot of confidence in the code.
>>
>>     This is very good idea. log4cpp is stable and mature package for a long 
>> time. Why not mirror that in its version as other does?
>>     I vote for 1.0 :)
>>
>> With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
>> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
>> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
>> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Log4cpp-devel mailing list
>> Log...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/log4cpp-devel
>>     
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Log4cpp-devel mailing list
> Log...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/log4cpp-devel
>   

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] short information about upcoming release

[Bastiaan B. <bas...@en...>]

Hi,

log4cpp's numbering started at 0.1 to show that he first release was
very much a work in progress. Then 0.2.x added autoconf based building
and 0.3.x threading support. Within each 0.x branch the aim was to keep
log4cpp backward compatible on at least API level. 
Initially 0.2.x was designated 'stable' and 0.3.x 'development' with the
intention to let it become a new 0.4.x 'stable'. 
But that was some time ago (before I handed over the project to Waffel).
So go ahead, name it version 1.0. The project is old enough to have a
1.0 :-)

Cheers,

Bastiaan

 

On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 18:59 +0300, Konstantin Litvinenko wrote:
> Hello, Scott!
> You wrote to <log...@li...> on Wed, 22 Aug 2007 
> 10:39:11 -0400:
> 
>  ??>>     I think we can make new release. What version it will be? 0.3.6?
> 
>  SC> Is there some magical criteria for 1.0? Using pre-release numbers
>  SC> doesn't suggest a lot of confidence in the code.
> 
>     This is very good idea. log4cpp is stable and mature package for a long 
> time. Why not mirror that in its version as other does?
>     I vote for 1.0 :)
> 
> With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Log4cpp-devel mailing list
> Log...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/log4cpp-devel

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] short information about upcoming release

[Konstantin L. <1da...@ma...>]

Hello, Scott!
You wrote to <log...@li...> on Wed, 22 Aug 2007 
10:39:11 -0400:

 ??>>     I think we can make new release. What version it will be? 0.3.6?

 SC> Is there some magical criteria for 1.0? Using pre-release numbers
 SC> doesn't suggest a lot of confidence in the code.

    This is very good idea. log4cpp is stable and mature package for a long 
time. Why not mirror that in its version as other does?
    I vote for 1.0 :)

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] short information about upcoming release

[Scott C. <can...@os...>]

>     I think we can make new release. What version it will be? 0.3.6?

Is there some magical criteria for 1.0? Using pre-release numbers doesn't
suggest a lot of confidence in the code.

-- Scott

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] short information about upcoming release

[Thomas W. <wa...@ho...>]

Hi Konstantin,

Nice ... lets see if I can do this at the weekend. I don't know =20
exactly the new version number ... must have a look into the configure =20
script and wiki how we increase the numbers. But I think you are right =20
... can be eventual 0.3.6.

Regards,

- waffel

Quoting Konstantin Litvinenko <Kon...@ma...>:

> Hello, waffel!
> You wrote to <log...@li...> on Mon, 13 Aug 2007
> 20:08:49 +0200:
>
>  w> I think Konstantin is right and we should create a minor version becau=
se
>  w> we have some new features and any bugfixes.
>
>     I think we can make new release. What version it will be? 0.3.6?
>
> With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Log4cpp-devel mailing list
> Log...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/log4cpp-devel
>

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] short information about upcoming release

[Konstantin L. <Kon...@ma...>]

Hello, waffel!
You wrote to <log...@li...> on Mon, 13 Aug 2007 
20:08:49 +0200:

 w> I think Konstantin is right and we should create a minor version because
 w> we have some new features and any bugfixes.

    I think we can make new release. What version it will be? 0.3.6?

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko. 

Re: [Log4cpp-devel] A note regarding Shibboleth use of log4cpp

[Konstantin L. <Kon...@ma...>]

Hello, Scott!
You wrote to <log...@li...> on Sun, 19 Aug 2007 
18:59:52 -0400:

 SC> Well, there are a couple of issues:

 SC> Not all of my changes are there, and all of them were done for a
 SC> reason.

    Yes and sorry. I was not sure about changing language from C++ to C is 
correct. Now I understend why it is needed.

 SC>  For example, the language isn't correctly set to C or C++ in the right

[Sorry, skipped]

 SC> For reference, the diff I ran is below with the changes that matter
 SC> left in.

    I think I have fixed all this. Please, check again.

With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko.