TopStreamsNet edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991723301
@ceki @remkop - it is not exactly true that it doesn't suffer from lookup
issue though.
If you look at how jndi works in 1.x you will find that there are
ceki edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991730650
Thank you for the detailed references.
**If the attacker can modify the config file on some system S, then S can be
assumed to be already penetrated to a large e
TopStreamsNet commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991739074
> If the attacker can modify log4j.properties (log4j 1.x), she she does not
need to download malicious code, she can just as easily place malicious class
files in the
jvz commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991744851
How about a man in the middle? Are the LDAP URLs validated? TLS certificate?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log
fyhao commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991747594
> Also, if this matters to you so much, why not show it with a donation to
the Apache Software Foundation
https://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html or this project'
fyhao removed a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991747594
> Also, if this matters to you so much, why not show it with a donation to
the Apache Software Foundation
https://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html or this
ceki edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991730650
Thank you for the detailed references.
**If the attacker can modify the config file on some system S, then S can be
assumed to be already penetrated to a large e
ceki edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991730650
Thank you for the detailed references.
**If the attacker can modify the config file on some system S, then S can be
assumed to have been already penetrated to a
ceki commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991754366
> I can't completely agree with this statement as I can see a whole number
of use-cases where users can legitimately amend configuration or it's part for
customization reasons
jvz commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991754874
Handing over control of an application's logging system to untrusted users
is already handing over the keys.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To r
ceki edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991754366
> I can't completely agree with this statement as I can see a whole number
of use-cases where users can legitimately amend configuration or it's part for
customization
ceki edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991754366
> I can't completely agree with this statement as I can see a whole number
of use-cases where users can legitimately amend configuration or it's part for
customization
pjfanning commented on pull request #5:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j-scala/pull/5#issuecomment-991768025
Thanks for the comments @jvz - I've only covered a fraction of the functions
so far - I'll keep tipping away but it could take a while. Scala macros are not
something I'
ceki edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991380319
When there are literally millions of log4j 1.x users out there, can you stop
toying around?
There is no lookup expansion in log4j 1.x and it does not suffer from
ceki commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991796194
> > When there are literally millions of log4j 1.x users out there, can you
stop toying around?
> > There is no lookup expansion in log4j 1.x and it does not suffer from
[C
ceki removed a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991796194
> > When there are literally millions of log4j 1.x users out there, can you
stop toying around?
> > There is no lookup expansion in log4j 1.x and it does not suffer
ceki commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991799399
> Handing over control of an application's logging system to untrusted users
is already handing over the keys.
Yes, that is probably in many cases. However, one can imag
pjfanning commented on pull request #5:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j-scala/pull/5#issuecomment-991800432
@jvz I'm wondering about some logger methods and why we don't just call the
delegate directly - that using the macro code doesn't seem to add anything in
some cases.
jsoref commented on a change in pull request #613:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/613#discussion_r767203869
##
File path: src/site/asciidoc/manual/appenders.adoc
##
@@ -1270,12 +1270,12 @@ new `` configuration element.
[cols=",,,",options="header",]
|=
rm5248 opened a new pull request #82:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/82
Alternative to PR #78
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsu
remkop edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-990494126
> Hi @rgoers, is log4j 1.x vulnerable?
Hi @yuezk, as far as I can tell, log4j 1.x does not support lookups. ~~I
also could not find any other reference to JNDI
remkop edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-990661374
> @remkop Which description is correct ?
@linux-ops You are asking me? Well, in my totally objective, completely
unbiased opinion, there is no doubt that my com
remkop edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-990758663
> @remkop , thanks for your reply. Just want to make it more clear, because
many people reach this issue mainly for the "JNDI lookup" CVE, so, for log4j
1.x, although
rgoers commented on pull request #613:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/613#issuecomment-991827829
@pjfanning That is one of my favorite words to misspell. :-)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub
jsoref commented on pull request #613:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/613#issuecomment-991828510
I don't care about credit. I make PRs to improve codebases. Feel free to
cherry-pick whichever pieces/ideas you like (or reimplement).
I've also made a corresponding s
ams-tschoening commented on pull request #79:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/79#issuecomment-991649922
Looks like you have simply missed to change
`src/test/resources/input/patternLayout13.properties`? I find all the other
files changed, but not this one.
--
This is
mdpollard commented on a change in pull request #607:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/607#discussion_r767031109
##
File path: src/site/xdoc/manual/layouts.xml.vm
##
@@ -1455,9 +1455,9 @@ WARN [main]: Message 2
ams-tschoening removed a comment on pull request #81:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/81#issuecomment-991705032
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific co
jvz commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991233294
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubsc
albertinix commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991225381
Does anyone know if removing the `JndiLookup` class is enough?
On the [Apache Log4j2 page](https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/) it's
stated to:
>Remove th
Marcono1234 commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991396409
The latest Java versions are most likely still vulnerable to RCE. While they
prevent loading classes from remote sources by default (`trustURLCodebase`
property mention
Marcono1234 edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991396409
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comme
pjfanning commented on pull request #613:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/613#issuecomment-991224174
One typo that I noticed earlier was 'primative' appearing in a few places in
one of the PRs related to the recent CVE issue.
(https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pu
rm5248 commented on pull request #81:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/81#issuecomment-991664058
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsub
Firminator commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991418303
> Also, if this matters to you so much, why not show it with a donation to
... or this project's main contributor https://github.com/sponsors/rgoers ?
Case of http
coldtobi closed pull request #79:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/79
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notificat
philipwhiuk commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991305906
>
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/1.2/apidocs/org/apache/log4j/net/JMSAppender.html
This presumably requires configuring the appending though, so a simple
FileA
ceki removed a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991796194
> > When there are literally millions of log4j 1.x users out there, can you
stop toying around?
> > There is no lookup expansion in log4j 1.x and it does not suffer
coldtobi edited a comment on pull request #79:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/79#issuecomment-991687037
> Looks like you have simply missed to change
`src/test/resources/input/patternLayout13.properties`? I find all the other
files changed, but not this one.
Goo
TopStreamsNet edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991723301
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific com
coldtobi edited a comment on pull request #81:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/81#issuecomment-991684540
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
coldtobi closed pull request #81:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/81
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notificat
remkop edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-990661374
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
remkop commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991387493
> When there are literally millions of log4j 1.x users out there, can you
stop toying around?
>
> There is no lookup expansion in log4j 1.x and it does not suffer from
vy commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991241208
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscr
coldtobi commented on pull request #79:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/79#issuecomment-991619447
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To uns
coldtobi commented on pull request #81:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/81#issuecomment-991684540
I'm not sure about what changes requested:
- The suggestion from @ams-tschoening for formatting the gitattributes file
- rm5248's comment
I thought that the pur
rm5248 merged pull request #76:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/76
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notificatio
rm5248 merged pull request #77:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/77
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notificatio
qqchaozai commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991724441
We build class like this：
package org.apache.logging.log4j.core.lookup;
public class JndiLookup {}
philipwhiuk edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991305906
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comme
jsoref commented on pull request #613:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/613#issuecomment-991828510
I don't care about credit. I make PRs to improve codebases. Feel free to
cherry-pick whichever pieces/ideas you like (or reimplement).
I've also made a corresponding s
ams-tschoening commented on pull request #81:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/81#issuecomment-991653650
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
fyhao removed a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991747594
> Also, if this matters to you so much, why not show it with a donation to
the Apache Software Foundation
https://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html or this
mosajjal commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991246265
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To un
lawndoc edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991297822
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
ahahu commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991354707
I'd also like to stress, that it is not sufficient to mitigate this
vulnerability by using a JRE/JDK version which prevents the RCE, nor should you
rely solely on your firewa
TopStreamsNet commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991723301
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
pjfanning commented on pull request #5:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j-scala/pull/5#issuecomment-991768025
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To
lawndoc commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991297822
I think this [fix has been
bypassed](https://twitter.com/stereotype32/status/1469313856229228544?s=20) and
that the latest release is still vulnerable... Haven't verified t
garydgregory commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991210213
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
T
fyhao commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991747594
> Also, if this matters to you so much, why not show it with a donation to
the Apache Software Foundation
https://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html or this project'
jsoref commented on a change in pull request #613:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/613#discussion_r767203869
##
File path: src/site/asciidoc/manual/appenders.adoc
##
@@ -1270,12 +1270,12 @@ new `` configuration element.
[cols=",,,",options="header",]
|=
ceki edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991380319
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To
TiloGit commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991215492
> > Can't find much info about it.
>
> grep-ing through the source code for jdk-11.0.1 we get
`src/java.naming/com/sun/jndi/ldap/VersionHelper.java: PrivilegedAction
ceki commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991380319
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubs
rgoers commented on pull request #613:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/613#issuecomment-991827829
@pjfanning That is one of my favorite words to misspell. :-)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub
rm5248 merged pull request #80:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/80
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notificatio
albertinix edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991225381
(re: the fix for versions <= 2.14.1)
Does anyone know if removing the `JndiLookup` class is enough?
On the [Apache Log4j2 page](https://logging.apache
GSPP commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991863991
With this fix, can a log message still cause any side-effect at all? If yes,
that seems rather dangerous since log messages are often attacker-controlled.
--
This is an auto
carterkozak commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991896511
@GSPP that was resolved in 2.15 via
https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/commit/001aaada7dab82c3c09cde5f8e14245dc9d8b454
--
This is an automated message from the
moparthisai commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991907877
We are using apache solr 8.6 version and we wan to update the version of
log4j2 on your runtime classpath ( Due to Apache Solr affected by Apache Log4J
CVE-2021-44228)
vy commented on a change in pull request #607:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/607#discussion_r767311920
##
File path: src/site/xdoc/manual/layouts.xml.vm
##
@@ -1455,9 +1455,9 @@ WARN [main]: Message 2
-
jyemin opened a new pull request #618:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/618
Check that the class name in the `javaClassName` attribute exactly matches
the class name in the `javaSerializedData`
attribute.
Background:
The new documentation states the follow
garydgregory commented on pull request #618:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/618#issuecomment-991969321
You'll need a test that fails without the main changes to prove this
actually works, please see our existing tests for inspiration. You might need
to use mocking to pr
jyemin commented on pull request #618:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/618#issuecomment-991969990
> You'll need a test that fails without the main changes to prove this
actually works
I agree, but I don't see a way to mock this. I'd appreciate any ideas, so
feel
garydgregory commented on pull request #618:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/618#issuecomment-991972061
Then perhaps consider refactoring the code in a way that makes it testable.
Otherwise, this is just one commit away from a regression :-(
--
This is an automated mes
ceki edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991799399
> Handing over control of an application's logging system to untrusted users
is already handing over the keys.
Yes, that is probably true in many cases. However,
jschauma opened a new pull request #620:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/620
It is my understanding that as of 2.15.0 `formatMsgNoLookups=true` by
default; this doc still showed that as "false".
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to
tony-- commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991982037
@zhangyoufu @remkop the suggestion to
> remove org/apache/logging/log4j/core/lookup/JndiLookup.class from
log4j-core-*.jar as a workaround
is called out as an opt
garydgregory commented on pull request #620:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/620#issuecomment-991982161
Hi @jschauma
The site is built from the release-2.x branch. The master branch is for work
toward 3.0.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service
remkop commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991982446
> @zhangyoufu @remkop the suggestion to
>
> > remove org/apache/logging/log4j/core/lookup/JndiLookup.class from
log4j-core-*.jar as a workaround
>
> is called o
jschauma commented on pull request #620:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/620#issuecomment-991982712
Should this change be reflected in both branches, or is the default value of
`formatMsgNoLookups` going to be `false` again in the 3.0 release?
Do you want me to sub
garydgregory commented on pull request #620:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/620#issuecomment-991983167
Yes but... things are in flux ATM as you can imagine and the team is still
dealing with the aftermath of this weekend's activity. I don't want you to
waste your time i
jschauma commented on pull request #620:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/620#issuecomment-991983856
Sure thing. Just wanted to make sure this doesn't get dropped or lost.
Happy to leave this PR dangling or close it out if you think it's being handled
already.
--
This
rgoers commented on pull request #618:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/618#issuecomment-991985075
This shouldn't be too hard to test. We just need to store the appropriate
attributes in the test LDAP to simulate an attack. Let me check this out and
see if I can help wit
jyemin commented on pull request #618:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/618#issuecomment-992009288
Figuring out how to test this is definitely worthwhile, but I think I'm
going to have to reconsider the approach. I had a closer look at
`ObjectInputStream`, and realized t
jambestwick commented on pull request #620:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/620#issuecomment-992018225
not well
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific co
jambestwick commented on pull request #618:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/618#issuecomment-992020861
@jyemin I agree with you ，need to test it
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
U
rgoers closed pull request #621:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/621
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notificati
garydgregory commented on pull request #621:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/621#issuecomment-992031700
1266 commits in this PR?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go t
ecki opened a new pull request #622:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/622
Trivial change
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe,
garydgregory commented on pull request #622:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/622#issuecomment-992059769
This should be for the release-2.x branch as well.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and
jyemin commented on pull request #618:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/618#issuecomment-992063803
I refactored and reimplemented using a hopefully more reliable design. The
bulk of the code has been extracted into a helper class and unit tested. The
conditional in Jndi
carterkozak commented on a change in pull request #623:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/623#discussion_r767392960
##
File path:
log4j-core/src/test/java/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/pattern/MessagePatternConverterTest.java
##
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ public void
remkop commented on a change in pull request #623:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/623#discussion_r767411342
##
File path: src/site/xdoc/manual/layouts.xml.vm
##
@@ -1497,18 +1497,6 @@ WARN [main]: Message 2
The call site can look like thi
rgoers commented on a change in pull request #623:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/623#discussion_r767417316
##
File path:
log4j-core/src/test/java/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/pattern/MessagePatternConverterTest.java
##
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ public void test
rgoers merged pull request #623:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/623
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notificati
ancms2600 commented on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-992140388
> If you look at how jndi works in 1.x you will find that there are two
places where lookups are done - that is JMSAppender.java:207 and
JMSAppender.java:222
For t
ancms2600 edited a comment on pull request #608:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-992140388
> If you look at how jndi works in 1.x you will find that there are two
places where lookups are done - that is JMSAppender.java:207 and
JMSAppender.java:222
3601 - 3700 of 7264 matches
Mail list logo
