Re: subject line bug on resumit elog entries as new?, posted by David Pilgram on Tue Jun 9 16:51:55 2015
|
Hi Stefan,
The email sent from here had he expected (correct) message "A new ELOG entry..."
Thanks, David. |
|
Re: subject line bug on resumit elog entries as new?, posted by Jacky Li on Tue Jun 9 22:31:59 2015
|
Hi,
I compiled the 3.1.0-2 source rpm from the download area. Unless there is a minor release, I think the problem is still there. Thank
you. |
Re: subject line bug on resumit elog entries as new?, posted by Stefan Ritt on Wed Jun 10 08:13:50 2015 
|
Making a new release takes me about an hour (compile under Windows, Linux, Mac OSX), so I don't do it for each little change. If you want to follow
the development closely, I recommend that you learn to compile elog from the GIT repository. It's pretty easy: a git
pull, followed by a make and |
|
Re: stunnel problems with new version, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Nov 15 21:25:34 2004
|
> i am trying to implement ssl features on our logbooks. however, it seems
> that stunnel has drastically changed their program and the usual startup
> procedures listed on the elog page don't work.
|
|
Re: stunnel problems with new version, posted by damon nettles on Mon Nov 15 21:59:56 2004
|
> > i am trying to implement ssl features on our logbooks. however, it seems
> > that stunnel has drastically changed their program and the usual startup
> > procedures listed on the elog page don't work.
|
|
Re: string length limit in url tag, posted by Andreas Luedeke on Thu Jul 21 06:15:44 2016
|
Several strings in ELOG are limited to 256 chars. It is likely the limit for URLs, too.
The magic number "256" appears 285
times in the elogd.c file.
It is probaly easier if you compress long URLs with goo.gl
Cheers, Andreas
Don wrote:
|
|
Re: strage colors when only 'cmd=Search' is given as command, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Jul 1 10:31:31 2002
|
> Try this URL
>
> http://midas.psi.ch/elogdemo/Forum/?cmd=Search
|
|
Re: still having email problems, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Mar 10 15:19:06 2008
|
The transcript below looks all ok to me, so it's most likely that the email went to your Spam folder.
mike cianci wrote: |