Demo Discussion
Forum Config Examples Contributions Vulnerabilities
  Discussion forum about ELOG, Page 217 of 796  Not logged in ELOG logo
New entries since:Thu Jan 1 01:00:00 1970
ID Date Icon Author Author Email Category OS ELOG Version Subject
  67997   Wed Jun 10 11:52:47 2015 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chQuestionAll3.1Re: Formatting multiple datetime entries

Edmund Hertle wrote:
Hey

in one of my measurement logbooks I'm using two datetime entries (for start and end time of a measurement). The entries are created automatically by the measurement script.
Attributes = Time Start, Time End

Type Time Start = datetime
Type Time End = datetime

Time format = %H:%M:%S
For better visual appearance I would like to only display the time on the two additional datetime fields but keep the full date and time on the standard date field. Using the "Time format" option will influence all three at once.

Is there an option to do something like the time format for individual attributes (similar to the syntax of adding comments etc)?

Example:
Attributes = Time Start, Time End

Type Time Start = datetime
Type Time End = datetime

Time format Time Start = %H:%M:%S
Time format Time End = %H:%M:%S


Ok, implemented in the current version.
  67996   Wed Jun 10 11:39:23 2015 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chBug reportLinux3.1.0Re: elconv deletes everything
> - elogd should not tell us to run elconv when both old-style and corresponding new-style elog entries exist

I removed that check completely. The old format was used up to 2002, so I expect that all users have upgraded in meantime.

Stefan
  67995   Wed Jun 10 11:36:48 2015 Entry Hanno Perreyhanno.perrey@nuclear.lu.seBug reportOtherELOG V3.1.1-5eaUpload of images fails from mobile platforms when using ELOG under SSL

Hej,

I discovered a problem uploading images taken with the cameras of mobile devices to new elog entries directly from said devices. When selecting the image and choosing "Upload", either the blue page loading indicator gets stuck at around 10% (mobile Safari, iOS 8.3, iPhone 4 and iPad mini) or the error message "failed secure connection; connection reset while page was being loaded" ("Fehler: gesicherte Verbindung fehlgeschlagen. Verbindung zum Server wurde zurueckgesetzt waehrend die Seite geladen wurde") appears shortly after (Android 5.02, Firefox 37.0.2, Motorola G).

From the desktop browser (Firefox 38.0.5, OSX 10.10) there is no problem uploading images at all.

So far, this problem is very reproducible, but only when using ELOG with SSL enabled. Without SSL, the problem disappears on all platforms.

The ELOG daemon runs under Linux (Fedora 18) and I have also tried using the latest development version of ELOG.

Running ELOG with debug messages the only output after the page has been loaded is:

TCP connection #0 on socket 4 closed
TCP connection #0 on socket 4 closed

After these, there is no further output and the mobile devices do not indicate any progress either even after many mi.

The minimal config file I have been using is:

[global]
; network
port = 443
SSL = 1
URL = https://my.server.somewhere/
; paths
Logbook dir = /usr/local/elog/logbooks
Resource dir = /usr/local/elog
Logfile = /tmp/elog.log


[demo]
Attributes = Author, Type, Category, Subject
Required Attributes = Author, Type
Options Type = Status, Modification, Problem Report, Problem Details, Problem Fixed, Other
Options Category = Facility, Experiment, IT, Other
List Page Title = $logbook - $subject

As mentioned before, removing the first three lines fixes the problem (the URL line points to my actual server of course).

I would appreciate any pointers on how to debug this further! The functionality of posting images directly from mobile devices is quite important for the planed deployment of ELOG and I would very much prefer to have SSL enabled when doing so.

 

Thanks and cheers,

Hanno

  67994   Wed Jun 10 10:55:00 2015 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chBug reportLinux3.1.0-2ELOG Forum: drafts cannot be deleted
> I think it would be nice to have three options:
> - "Submit": making the draft entry a "real" entry, with an ID
> - "Abort": keeping the entry as a draft entry as it currently is (or was 10 sec ago)
> - "Delete": removing the draft entry.
> 
> I understand that the draft is overwritten currently by the "Back" button, but why does it get an ID and does not stay as a "Draft"?
> As a quick fix you may skip the "Abort" for now and just provide "Submit" and "Delete".

Any entry in elog (also drafts) need an ID in order to be stored on the server, no way around that.

The "Abort" button is exactly the same as the "Back" button, just the name is different. But I think the meaning will not be so clear
to the users. They could expect to abort the edit, and get the version as it was before they started editing (which is not possible).

So I'm tempted to just have "Submit" and "Delete". If one wants to abort, one can navigate away from the page, and confirm the "Leave page"
dialog box. So experts who know what they do can still do an abort if necessary.

Stefan
  67993   Wed Jun 10 10:43:02 2015 Reply Andreas Luedekeandreas.luedeke@psi.chBug reportLinux3.1.0-2ELOG Forum: drafts cannot be deleted
> > Another strange thing: the draft got submitted when I hit the "Back" button after reopening it.
> 
> Well, this is a problem indeed. When edit entries now, drafts gets saved regularly, overwriting your original entry. 
> This is a limitation of the elog database, which cannot do full versioning. 
> So "Back" is actually the same as "Commit without email notification". Or better "Commit some ten seconds ago". 
> Now I don't know what the best solution is.
> I'm tempted to just remove the "Back" button and replace it with a "Delete" button.
> So people can either submit an entry or delete it completely. Any thoughts?

I think it would be nice to have three options:
- "Submit": making the draft entry a "real" entry, with an ID
- "Abort": keeping the entry as a draft entry as it currently is (or was 10 sec ago)
- "Delete": removing the draft entry.

I understand that the draft is overwritten currently by the "Back" button, but why does it get an ID and does not stay as a "Draft"?
As a quick fix you may skip the "Abort" for now and just provide "Submit" and "Delete".
  67992   Wed Jun 10 09:12:06 2015 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chBug reportLinux3.10.2Re: Path disclosure on unfound file

What URL did you use? If I try here on this forum I get:

which looks fine to me.

 

Bruce Bush wrote:

Greetings,

  Running elog 3.1.0 on CentOS 6.6.  When I try to access a nonexistent file, elog reveals a path in the 404 page.  For example:

Not Found

The requested file /usr/local/elog/themes/default/blortblortblort7854.htm was not found on this server


ELOG version 3.1.0
 
  Is there any way to use a custom 404 page with elog, or to make it stop displaying the file information?
 
Thank you,
bb
 
 

 

 

  67991   Wed Jun 10 08:13:50 2015 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chQuestionLinuxV3.1.1-2c4f838Re: subject line bug on resumit elog entries as new?

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 make install.

If you want to see which changes are already in the version you are running, look at the 7 digit GIT hash at the bottom of each elog page and compare it with the bitbucket repository:

 

Jacky Li wrote:

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.

Jack

  67990   Tue Jun 9 22:31:59 2015 Reply Jacky Lizli@hawaii.eduQuestionLinuxV3.1.1-2c4f838Re: subject line bug on resumit elog entries as new?

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.

Jacky

David Pilgram wrote:

Hi Stefan,

The email sent from here had he expected (correct) message "A new ELOG entry..."

Thanks, David.

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Any better now?

David Pilgram wrote:

Hi Stefan,

I see that you've updated the elog running this forum today, 5 versions after you reported fixing the "A new elog entry has been entered" and "An old elog entry has been updated" issue.  But the emails coming out are still all of the "An old elog entry...", rather than "A new..."

 

 

ELOG V3.1.5-fe60aaf