LDEV-3028 - “The servlet context has already been initialized” error in Application.log of Undertow deployments LDEV-3975 - ESAPI functions result in “CTOR threw exception” error with 2.2.4.5 extension LDEV-3978 - regression: Cflog stops writing to files LDEV-3980 - jdbc commit issues using transactions and hibernate LDEV-3976 - RamCache out of memory ignored LDEV-3979 - Regression: Custom cookie parsing now used over servlet’s cookies
Just one small fix since the 5.3.9.141-RC LDEV-3680 race condition in getRPCClassLoader
Code Changes
Give them a go and let us know here if you have any problems
I did not imagine there would be a difference between 5.3.9.141-RC (what we tested) and the release (what I applied to production without testing) and I did not double check. That’s on me although a new rev number would have been a helpful indicator.
As we (the community) learn and improve - it would be my preference/vote to increment the version number when there are changes. Are there technical reasons this isn’t feasible if automated?
one of the reasons why i prefer the manual increments of build versions, there are 519 commits for 5.3.9, but only 141 SNAPSHOTS, it makes hunting down regressions much easier
Alas @micstriit didn’t bump the build number before making the release, next time we’ll do better!
Expect “h i !” and /tmp/a/WEB-INF/lucee/logs/application.log appears with two entries
Actual : “h i !” but no folder, no log files
If I cd /tmp/a ; mkdir -p WEB-INF/lucee/logs/ ; touch WEB-INF/lucee/logs/application.log I get a .htaccess in WEB-INF created, but still no log entries
The meta question is how things like this keep slipping through ? I didn’t have time to test the RCs (sorry !), but the last time logging broke I produced a two-file repo case, for instance, and this time it’s even simpler because it seems there is no output at all for any logs that don’t specify the optional file argument.
Are these not being added to a test suite ? Can we (the community) help maintain a test suite some where ?
Depends on what “v6” means. Is it like Chrome/FireFox where v5.4 is arbitrarily bumped to v6 or is it more like semver where it has breaking changes ? If the latter then I think it’s worth fixing 5.x because who know what other bugs v6 has…
After running several days using 5.3.9.158 I can say logging is still working as expected.
RE: .157 -
The log file (that stopped recording) would be Application.log
Environment is windows.
File size was ~4MB at the time. Rotation is set at 10MB.
