Change in properties for logging: deliberate?

[Daniel Fuchs]

Hi Jeremy,

Which jdk version/distribution are you using?

I see .level = INFO in the jdk9/master sources:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/file/tip/src/java.logging/share/conf/logging.properties

There should be no changes WRT the default level between 8 and 9.

best regards,

-- daniel

On 09/11/2017 01:09, Jeremy Manson wrote:
> Hey folks,
> 
> I can't find reference to this in a relnote, so I thought I would ask.  If
> we have the following files:
> 
> logging.properties:
> 
> # Set the level of the root logger
> .level = INFO
> 
> # Send the root logger's output to the console
> .handlers = java.util.logging.ConsoleHandler
> 
> Test.java:
> public class Test {
>    public static void main(String[] args) {
>      java.util.logging.Logger.getAnonymousLogger().info("Hi!");
>    }
> }
> 
> In Java 8, we will see console output, and in Java 9, we won't.
> 
> # Java 8
> $ java -Djava.util.logging.config.file=logging.properties Test
> Nov 08, 2017 5:02:05 PM Test main
> INFO: Hi!
> 
> # Java 9
> $ java -Djava.util.logging.config.file=logging.properties Test
> 
> 
> I thought that, perhaps, a decision was made to have the empty string no
> longer mean the root logger, so I took it off of .handlers:
> 
> logging.properties:
> 
> # Set the level of the root logger
> .level = INFO
> 
> # Send the root logger's output to the console
> handlers = java.util.logging.ConsoleHandler
> 
> Success in the sense that this got me output in Java 9.  However, .level
> still seems to work; if I then have:
> 
> # Set the level of the root logger
> .level = WARNING
> 
> # Send the root logger's output to the console
> handlers = java.util.logging.ConsoleHandler
> 
> it sets the root logger's level to WARNING.
> 
> I don't see any of this in a relnote anywhere, and I don't see an obvious
> bug about it anywhere.  There seem to have been a fair few changes to
> java.util.logging in Java 9.  Was a documented decision made to have
> .handlers stop meaning handlers on the root logger, but to allow .level to
> continue meaning level on the root logger?  Or do I just have the wrong end
> of the stick on this?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Jeremy
>