Page browsing links in Find mode broken, posted by Yoshio Imai on Wed Jan 11 15:54:28 2006
|
Hi!
We are having problems with the "Find" mode in the latest revision. When we used "Find" to search for specific texts, and the results span more than one page (say, 2 for example), the page links in the command bar on top point to the ELOG pages rather than the find result pages. This means that, when I click onto "Previous" from find result page 2 (which is the first page getting displayed), I get to logbook page 1 (entries 1 to 20) and not to the previous page of find results. I think this didn't happen in earlier versions. Could you check that? It also happens here in the Forum.
Thanks
Yoshio |
Re: Page browsing links in Find mode broken, posted by Stefan Ritt on Wed Jan 11 21:06:06 2006
|
| Thanks for reporting this bug, I fixed it in revision 1597. |
|
Side effects from debugging, posted by Yoshio Imai on Thu Jan 12 11:32:19 2006
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: | | Thanks for reporting this bug, I fixed it in revision 1597. |
Thanks for your quick reaction! Unfortunately, there is one side effect. As far as I understand, you fixed the bug by preserving the command attributeshttp://www.logbook.domain/logbook/pageN?command when browsing with the Goto page links, so that when a filter is applied, it is still active upon page change. However, the same is true for all other commands, including the ?id=NNN command which is active when clicking List from single entry view. If you click onto, e.g. Previous in this mode, the elogd has a conflict in that it is required to display one page and having to highlight an entry that resides on another. http://www.logbook.domain/logbook/pageN?id=NNN The highlighting supersedes, and the page browse links are effectively disabled. Is there a way to keep the bug fix but disable the side effects, e.g. selectively not preserving the ?id=NNN upon page browsing? Maybe you could implement a "blacklist" of not-to-be-preserved commands, in case there are other problems like this one.
Thanks for the work (I saw the timestamp!)
Yoshio |
|
Side effects from debugging, posted by Yoshio Imai on Thu Jan 12 11:38:13 2006
|
Addendum: in the Forum, I found a very strange effect: When deliberately highlighting an entry (http://midas.psi.ch/elogs/Forum/?id=1858), the Elog server no longer keeps the page partitioning, but displays ALL entries of the logbook. I don't know if these problems are related, but maybe you could check (we use the "Full" mode for the list view, in case that matters). I have tried to reproduce the problem with our logbook in threaded mode, but we don't seem to have this problem there.
Yoshio |
|
Side effects from debugging, posted by Stefan Ritt on Thu Jan 12 15:50:51 2006
|
| Both problems have been fixed in revision 1598. |
Getting back from "Find" mode, posted by Yoshio Imai on Tue Nov 15 10:58:23 2005
|
Hi again!
There is one question regarding the "Find" function of the elog. Clicking onto "Search" takes the user to the list view on only those entries that match the search conditions. Since we use the list view in "Full" mode by default, this usually is enough to give us an overview of the event we looked for.
Is there a more direct way to get back to the unfiltered list view than selecting an entry and go to "List" or using "Find" again and clicking on "Back"?
Greeting
Yoshio |
|
Re: Getting back from "Find" mode, posted by Stefan Ritt on Tue Nov 15 12:50:37 2005
|
| Yoshio Imai wrote: | There is one question regarding the "Find" function of the elog. Clicking onto "Search" takes the user to the list view on only those entries that match the search conditions. Since we use the list view in "Full" mode by default, this usually is enough to give us an overview of the event we looked for.
Is there a more direct way to get back to the unfiltered list view than selecting an entry and go to "List" or using "Find" again and clicking on "Back"? |
I can easily add another button for that, will put it on the wish list. |
Re: Getting back from "Find" mode, posted by Stefan Ritt on Wed Jan 11 21:12:13 2006 
|
| Yoshio Imai wrote: | | Is there a more direct way to get back to the unfiltered list view than selecting an entry and go to "List" or using "Find" again and clicking on "Back"? |
Yes, just click on the logbook tab on the very top of the page. |
|
Date imports from CSV incorrectly, posted by David Brody on Tue Jan 10 00:32:19 2006
|
When I import from a CSV file, dates formatted as mm/dd/yy always get imported as 12/31/1969
Here are the parameters I am using for dates:
Attributes = Ticket #, Status, Assigned To, Status Date, Install Date, Category, Activity, Environment, Component, TstTrk
Type Status Date = date
Type Install Date = date
Date format = %A, %d %B, %Y
Preset Status Date = $date
Thanks!
DB |
|
Re: Date imports from CSV incorrectly, posted by David Brody on Tue Jan 10 19:30:09 2006
|
| David Brody wrote: | When I import from a CSV file, dates formatted as mm/dd/yy always get imported as 12/31/1969
Here are the parameters I am using for dates:
Attributes = Ticket #, Status, Assigned To, Status Date, Install Date, Category, Activity, Environment, Component, TstTrk
Type Status Date = date
Type Install Date = date
Date format = %A, %d %B, %Y
Preset Status Date = $date
Thanks!
DB |
Never mind. I figured it out! |
|
MS Fonts only in ELCode options?, posted by T. Ribbrock on Wed Jan 4 12:05:21 2006
|
I'm just after installing 2.6.0 and marvelling at all the changes, especially ELCode (I was using 2.5.8 previously). However, I noticed that the "FONT" menu for ELCodes only offers Microsoft fonts  - something I usually avoid like hell when publishing web content, as I cannot rely on those being installed on the clients. As far as I can see there is no easy way to change this, short of patching the source - or is there?
I'd want to add at least options like "serif" and "sans-serif" and maybe some standard (Unix\?) fonts like "Helvetica". |
|
Re: MS Fonts only in ELCode options?, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Jan 9 20:53:28 2006
|
| T. Ribbrock wrote: | I'm just after installing 2.6.0 and marvelling at all the changes, especially ELCode (I was using 2.5.8 previously). However, I noticed that the "FONT" menu for ELCodes only offers Microsoft fonts - something I usually avoid like hell when publishing web content, as I cannot rely on those being installed on the clients. As far as I can see there is no easy way to change this, short of patching the source - or is there?
I'd want to add at least options like "serif" and "sans-serif" and maybe some standard (Unix\?) fonts like "Helvetica". |
In revision 1593 I implemented a "Fonts = ..." option where you can specify a list of fonts to be shown on the list. I tried however the MS set of fonts on a Linux system, and found that the MS fonts got mapped to Unix fonts in a reasonable way. Even the Comic Sans MS font was avalilable. |
|
Re: MS Fonts only in ELCode options?, posted by T. Ribbrock on Tue Jan 10 10:42:18 2006
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
In revision 1593 I implemented a "Fonts = ..." option where you can specify a list of fonts to be shown on the list. I tried however the MS set of fonts on a Linux system, and found that the MS fonts got mapped to Unix fonts in a reasonable way. Even the Comic Sans MS font was avalilable. |
Very nice, thanks! Yes, vou're right, MS fonts have a chance of working on newer Linux distributions, but not on all and there are still older ones out there - never mind all those folks sitting behind some kind of Solaris/Sparc box or similar...  |
|
HelpELCode needs to be present in "Menu commands"?, posted by T. Ribbrock on Wed Jan 4 12:26:31 2006
|
| Another little issue I came across was this: I'm using "Menu commands" and "Guest Menu commands" in my configuration. When I logged in and started to create a new entry, clicking on the URL that is behind "ELCode" at the bottom of the screen (and accesses the help for the ELCodes) resulted in a "command denied". The only way to get around this was to add "HelpELCode" to "Menu commands" - but now it also shows up in the menus, which is not what I want. Is there any way around this? |
|
Re: HelpELCode needs to be present in "Menu commands"?, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Jan 9 20:19:32 2006
|
| T. Ribbrock wrote: | | Another little issue I came across was this: I'm using "Menu commands" and "Guest Menu commands" in my configuration. When I logged in and started to create a new entry, clicking on the URL that is behind "ELCode" at the bottom of the screen (and accesses the help for the ELCodes) resulted in a "command denied". The only way to get around this was to add "HelpELCode" to "Menu commands" - but now it also shows up in the menus, which is not what I want. Is there any way around this? |
Thanks for reporting that problem. I fixed that in revision 1592. |
|
"Logkook dir" in top group [global] section ineffective, posted by Yoshio Imai on Thu Nov 24 20:08:00 2005
|
Hi, it's me again!
I have found one possible bug. We have declared top groups for our logbooks; one for administration and one for the shift logbooks. In the [global]-section there is a "Logbook dir"-statement of the form
[global]
Top group Admin = <...>
Top group Shiftlogs = beamtime1,beamtime2,...
Logbook dir = /data/logbooks
Now, in the [global Shiftlogs] section there is another "Logbook dir"-statement to have all associated logbooks in one tree:
[global Shiftlogs]
Logbook dir = /data/logbooks/shift-logbooks
[beamtime1]
Subdir = beamtime1
The problem is, that the manually created subdirectories /data/logbooks/shift-logbooks/beamtimeN are ignored, and the elogd creates new "Subdir"-directories /data/logbooks/beamtimeN (as if the "Logbook dir" statement in the top group [global] section were ineffective). Is this a bug or configuration error from our side?
There are also one question/request (you see that we use the elog extensively now  ):
When searching for a particular event in our shift log using the "Find" function, it would often be useful not to go to the single entry, but to the page where that entry resides. This way we can see the whole context of the event. When clicking onto an entry in the "Find" result page, this takes us of course to the single entry, but could you add a function to go to the page instead. Alternatively, is it possible to include a button "Go to page" in the single entry view (it need not even be exactly +/-N entries around, the usual page partition would do)?
Thanks in advance.
Yoshio |
|
Re: "Logkook dir" in top group [global] section ineffective, posted by Yoshio Imai on Fri Nov 25 14:05:08 2005
|
| OK, I found the note about "Logbook dir" in Stephen Wood's entry (http://midas.psi.ch/elogs/Forum/1101) |
|
Re: "Logkook dir" in top group [global] section ineffective, posted by Stefan Ritt on Thu Dec 22 20:50:57 2005
|
| Yoshio Imai wrote: | There are also one question/request (you see that we use the elog extensively now ):
When searching for a particular event in our shift log using the "Find" function, it would often be useful not to go to the single entry, but to the page where that entry resides. This way we can see the whole context of the event. When clicking onto an entry in the "Find" result page, this takes us of course to the single entry, but could you add a function to go to the page instead. Alternatively, is it possible to include a button "Go to page" in the single entry view (it need not even be exactly +/-N entries around, the usual page partition would do)? |
I implemented that request. When you click on "list", it takes you to the listing page containing the current entry, which is even highlighted. Have a look at this forum if this is what you like. |
|
Re: "Logkook dir" in top group [global] section ineffective, posted by Yoshio Imai on Wed Jan 4 15:27:31 2006
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: | | I implemented that request. When you click on "list", it takes you to the listing page containing the current entry, which is even highlighted. Have a look at this forum if this is what you like. |
Thank you!
I just installed the latest revision; it is exactly what we need.
I found one problem, however: while linking the binaries for elogd, the linker complained about an undefined reference to forkpty implemented in libutil. I had to add the linker option -lutil to the Makefile target elogd:, then it compiled correctly.
One strange thing (maybe it isn't strange at all) is the following behaviour: when the list view is set to "summary", then the line containing the entry where we clicked "list" is highlighted, however when the list view is set to "full", it isn't. Is this "a bug, or a feature"?
Thanks for the work from all, and happy new year.
Yoshio |
|
Re: "Logkook dir" in top group [global] section ineffective, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Jan 9 20:09:16 2006
|
| Yoshio Imai wrote: | | One strange thing (maybe it isn't strange at all) is the following behaviour: when the list view is set to "summary", then the line containing the entry where we clicked "list" is highlighted, however when the list view is set to "full", it isn't. Is this "a bug, or a feature"? |
Was a bug. I have fixed that in revision 1591. |
elogd 2.6.0 crash on password Forgot?, posted by Mike on Tue Jan 3 17:20:16 2006
|
I have been having a repeatable crash on V2.6.0 everytime someone tries to recover a password using the option from the login screen. See attachment for a jpg of the message.
This is occuring on windows 2003. But I have also tested it on windows XP and it occurs there as well. In addition on XP I did a generic installtion and added the password option to the DEMO application and it fails there as well.
Mike |
|
"Syntax of elogd.cfg" - Document, posted by Edmundo T Rodriguez on Thu Dec 22 21:15:19 2005
|
The document "ELOG - Syntax of elogd.cfg" is outdated!
Are we going to have an updated documented?
How much difference exists between the one posted as a reference
and new one covering all new options in ELOG? |
|
Re: "Syntax of elogd.cfg" - Document, posted by Stefan Ritt on Fri Dec 23 09:07:14 2005
|
| Edmundo T Rodriguez wrote: | | The document "ELOG - Syntax of elogd.cfg" is outdated! |
I forgot to update the web server, but the document distributed in the 2.6.0 package was up to date.
| Edmundo T Rodriguez wrote: | | Are we going to have an updated documented? |
I copied the actual version to the web server.
| Edmundo T Rodriguez wrote: | How much difference exists between the one posted as a reference
and new one covering all new options in ELOG? |
For the changes from one version to the other, have a look at the changelog. |