Add safe checks and make sure log4j configuration has log4j2 format#12061
Add safe checks and make sure log4j configuration has log4j2 format#12061harikrishna-patnala wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:4.20from
Conversation
d89db3e to
191be03
Compare
|
@blueorangutan package |
|
@harikrishna-patnala a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
|
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 15741 |
|
@blueorangutan test |
|
@DaanHoogland a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
|
[SF] Trillian test result (tid-14871)
|
|
I've also added a document PR which adds a notes to check the log4j2 format before upgrade apache/cloudstack-documentation#604 If there is any risk with the changes in this PR, I'm happy to only go with the document change |
Pearl1594
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@harikrishna-patnala Is this solution only for debian?
|
Thanks for the review @Pearl1594 and @DaanHoogland . I'm closing the PR in favor of the document PR (apache/cloudstack-documentation#604) which seems to be enough as this behavior is expected |
Description
This PR is trying to address the issue mentioned in #10665
Added few safe checks and operations accordingly to make sure configuration is of log4j format.
I've also added a document PR which adds a notes to check the log4j2 format before upgrade apache/cloudstack-documentation#604
If there is any risk with the changes in this PR, I'm happy to only go with the document change
Types of changes
Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity
Feature/Enhancement Scale
Bug Severity
Screenshots (if appropriate):
How Has This Been Tested?
How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?