This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 19764 - Need more identification on tomcat log display
Summary: Need more identification on tomcat log display
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: serverplugins
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Tomcat (show other bugs)
Version: 3.x
Hardware: All Windows ME/2000
: P2 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Milan Kuchtiak
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2002-01-25 01:45 UTC by jhoffman
Modified: 2002-02-04 13:06 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:


Attachments
Which log goes with which Tomcat 4 installation? (205.07 KB, image/jpeg)
2002-01-25 01:46 UTC, jhoffman
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description jhoffman 2002-01-25 01:45:17 UTC
See the attached screen shot.  

Consider that there are two Tomcat 4 server instances installed under the Tomcat 4 integration 
module node.  If I open the root context log (for example) for both servers, there is no way for 
me to tell which log belongs to which server, since the default names for these servers are the
same.  I think we need to append some unique identifier (perhaps the port number, since many
instances may have the same "localhost" host name and path names can be long).
Comment 1 jhoffman 2002-01-25 01:46:36 UTC
Created attachment 4414 [details]
Which log goes with which Tomcat 4 installation?
Comment 2 _ rkubacki 2002-01-25 07:37:23 UTC
At least annotation on editor tab should distinguish them. Their names
can be long.
Comment 3 Milan Kuchtiak 2002-01-28 14:43:01 UTC
I think that this is analogous to the 
same java class names in different packages.

If you look at the hint(annotation),it is evident, that logs are from 
different directories. 

Names with path names could be really long and distinguish by the 
port numbers could be still insufficient.

I suggest to close this bug.
Comment 4 Petr Jiricka 2002-01-29 11:11:00 UTC
Version -> current, as this bug does not appear in NB 3.3
Comment 5 Milan Kuchtiak 2002-02-04 13:06:02 UTC
Closed owning to the comment on Jan/28/2002.