ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
1738
|
Wed Mar 1 12:27:36 2006 |
| Holger Mundhahs | holger.mundhahs@vtg-rail.com | Question | Windows | 2.6.1-1653 | [SOLVED] Re: list view mode remembert - Bug? |
> > As default http://<hostname>/<LOGBOOK> shows the Summary View.
> > Clicking in "Full" changes the URL to http://<hostname>/<LOGBOOK>/?mode=full.
> > But now the URL http://<hostname>/<LOGBOOK> show the Full view as default.
> > I think the URL without ?mode=... should show every time the same result,
> > regardless the view used before. Or maybe I can configure, which view I want to
> > see if I use the URL w/o ?mode=... The option to hide/show attachments is affected too.
>
> Sure, that's a feature :D
>
> It was requested by several people that the view mode is stored in a cookie. So if you switch modes, it should be
> persistent. If I now add additional default flags, people will have hard time to understand what this is all
> about, since there might then be conflicting settings between the flags and the cookies. So for what exact purpose
> do you want what you requested? Why does it bother you that you have to click "Summary" again to get the summary
> view? Of course you can delete the local cookies and get the default behaviour (they are named [b]elmode[/b] and
> [b]elattach[/b]), but that might be a bit cumbersome.
Thank you for your explanation. My situation was, that I've played around with "Mode commands = 0". In normal case I
use the Summary view, but on one logbook I've changed it to Full before, and after setting the parameter I can't
revert it to Summary. But now I know how it works and can use it like intended.
Regards
Holger |
1740
|
Wed Mar 1 20:22:28 2006 |
| Steve Jones | steve.jones@freescale.com | Question | All | 2.5.9 | Re: eLog Version number as eLog attribute? |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Steve Jones wrote: | When a footer is used (via Bottom text = <filename>) eLog no longer displays the eLog version number at the bottom. Is it possible to somehow expose the version/revision as an eLog attribute or have the version still display even when a replacement footer is specified?
Thanks! |
I added that feature, but will not be able to commit it before the next weekend. |
Quote: | Not a problem! Thanks |
|
1758
|
Mon Mar 6 18:36:34 2006 |
| Steve Jones | steve.jones@freescale.com | Question | All | 2.5.9 | [RESOLVED] eLog Version number as eLog attribute? |
Steve Jones wrote: |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Steve Jones wrote: | When a footer is used (via Bottom text = <filename>) eLog no longer displays the eLog version number at the bottom. Is it possible to somehow expose the version/revision as an eLog attribute or have the version still display even when a replacement footer is specified?
Thanks! |
I added that feature, but will not be able to commit it before the next weekend. |
Quote: | Not a problem! Thanks |
|
Steve Jones wrote: | Works as requested!! |
|
1761
|
Tue Mar 7 21:41:28 2006 |
| Haitao Yu | htyu@phys.columbia.edu | Question | Linux | 2.6.1 | large attachment seems to hang elogd? |
Hello,
I am trying to attach somewhat large file (4-15MB files tested) with my messages but it seems to hang the elogd server for a really long time (30-100minutes). The file upload was done pretty soon (within a few seconds), then the elogd process seems to be busy doing something, using around 50MB of memory and 95% of CPU time, and stop respond to the requests. I can read the logbook with another copy of elogd running on another port, and I can see (and download) the uploaded file. I am wondering what could cause the problem --- and could it be related to the problem of not setting up the SMTP server right? Thanks for any suggestion!
Haitao
P.S. I read in some old message that if we want to upload very large files, we have to change the WEB_BUFFER_SIZE in elogd.c, however this parameter is no longer in v2.6.1. Is there something similiar I have to change? |
1767
|
Thu Mar 9 21:10:18 2006 |
| Edmundo T Rodriguez | edrodrig@chpnet.org | Question | Linux | 2.6.1 | Problem submitting entries in ELOG after migrating from Windows to Linux |
I was able to install ELOG v2.61. in a Compaq ProLiant DL360 running with SUSE Linux v10
The migration/implementation went quiet well ...
ELOG v2.6.1 application came up find!.
I can login with No problems.
I can see previous logs entries, sort, etc.
But, I can NOT create any new-log (new entries) in any logbook. I get this message:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New entry cannot be written to directory
"/eLOGv261/logbooks/Administration/"
Please check that it exists and elogd has write access and disk is not full
Please use your browser's back button to go back
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The previous logbooks where in ...
\Program Files\ELOG\logbooks\Administration
\MainFrame
\Unix
\OpenVMS
\RDBMS
New logbooks are in the following place ...
/eLOGv261/logbooks/Administration
/MainFrame
/Unix
/OpenVMS
/RDBMS
How can it read old log entries and I NOT create new ones?
I am sure I missing something. Can I know what?
Also, It will be good to have an entry in the ELOG web-site
explaining any migration steps from Window to Linux and reverse!
Please, help.
Thank you! |
1768
|
Fri Mar 10 06:12:55 2006 |
| Steve Jones | steve.jones@freescale.com | Question | Linux | 2.6.1 | Re: Problem submitting entries in ELOG after migrating from Windows to Linux |
Edmundo T Rodriguez wrote: | I was able to install ELOG v2.61. in a Compaq ProLiant DL360 running with SUSE Linux v10
The migration/implementation went quiet well ...
ELOG v2.6.1 application came up find!.
I can login with No problems.
I can see previous logs entries, sort, etc.
But, I can NOT create any new-log (new entries) in any logbook. I get this message:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New entry cannot be written to directory
"/eLOGv261/logbooks/Administration/"
Please check that it exists and elogd has write access and disk is not full
Please use your browser's back button to go back
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The previous logbooks where in ...
\Program Files\ELOG\logbooks\Administration
\MainFrame
\Unix
\OpenVMS
\RDBMS
New logbooks are in the following place ...
/eLOGv261/logbooks/Administration
/MainFrame
/Unix
/OpenVMS
/RDBMS
How can it read old log entries and I NOT create new ones?
I am sure I missing something. Can I know what?
Also, It will be good to have an entry in the ELOG web-site
explaining any migration steps from Window to Linux and reverse!
Please, help.
Thank you! |
Steve Jones wrote: | The first place to look is at the permissions set on the existing directories and .log files plus the Owner and Group. (Not knowing how the files got from Windows to Linux is a little problematic but the translation of permissions is not straightforward.) Compare the settings with how you have eLog starting up on your linux box. Typically, when run as a daemon, it starts as ROOT then becomes the USER/GROUP that you specify in the .cfg file. It is likely that you will find a permission mismatch. As to why you can read but not write, with a permission mask of 744 and .log files owned by root but elogd running as nobody, you would be able to read the logs but not change them. Sounds like the permissions are similar on the directories as well. Perhaps you could post the info back here.
|
|
1780
|
Fri Mar 31 22:14:38 2006 |
| Chris Warner | christopher_warner@dcd.uscourts.gov | Question | Linux | 2.61 | Anonymous vs user posts |
If I have a logbook that will let both registered users Anonymous users post. I would like the author attribute to default to the value in $long_name but if the post is Anonymous display a default text string "Anonymous". Is it possible to do this? |
1781
|
Sat Apr 1 15:30:32 2006 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Linux | 2.61 | Re: Anonymous vs user posts |
Chris Warner wrote: | If I have a logbook that will let both registered users Anonymous users post. I would like the author attribute to default to the value in $long_name but if the post is Anonymous display a default text string "Anonymous". Is it possible to do this? |
I added that functionality into the intermediate release 2.6.1-4 which you can download from the ELOG site. |