Enhanced "eLog Version" Variable, posted by Steve Jones on Fri Sep 24 19:17:52 2004
|
Stefan, would it be ok to add the "minor" revision level to the VERSION
constant? I've been doing this after I download source just so I can keep
things straight, you keep cranking out versions ;->
|
Re: Enhanced "eLog Version" Variable, posted by Steve Jones on Wed Oct 6 06:14:36 2004
|
No big deal - I looked at the code and you did a much more thorough job than I
would have done. Appreciate all of the hard work -- this product is masterful!
|
Re: external authentication possible?, posted by Steve Jones on Mon Dec 6 22:48:19 2004
|
> > In order to avoid having to remember multiple usernames/passwords for
> > different systems, is it possible for ELOG to use external authentication
> > via Active Directory, etc?
|
Re: external authentication possible?, posted by Steve Jones on Wed Dec 15 15:42:13 2004
|
> > The only common denominator that could possibly cover all contingencies would
> > be LDAP authentication. One way of doing this in a more-or-less universal
> > fashion is to offload the auth task from eLog itself and place the burden on
|
|
Re: external authentication possible?, posted by Steve Jones on Thu Dec 16 05:23:54 2004
|
> > Ah, you test me! Perhaps I will attempt to dig into this but I may have to leave the
> > integration up to you, Stefan. Seems that there would be two roads to go:
> > 1> Move away from standalone and start to rely on Apache
|
Version of GCC to use?, posted by Steve Jones on Mon May 9 20:23:59 2005
|
What is the recommended version of gcc to use with elog 2.5.9? I searched
the discussion database but found nothing pertaining to this.
|
|
Re: Version of GCC to use?, posted by Steve Jones on Mon May 9 20:51:23 2005
|
> > What is the recommended version of gcc to use with elog 2.5.9? I searched
> > the discussion database but found nothing pertaining to this.
>
|
|
Re: Version of GCC to use?, posted by Steve Jones on Mon May 9 20:58:11 2005
|
> > I ask because I get a dependency that I did not have before with 2.5.3.
> > Compiling with my same 'ole gcc 2.95.2 I see that I now need mxml.h and
> > strlcpy.h. Trying to compile under gcc 3.4 results in all kinds of errors.
|