Demo Discussion
Forum Config Examples Contributions Vulnerabilities
  Discussion forum about ELOG, Page 224 of 796  Not logged in ELOG logo
New entries since:Thu Jan 1 01:00:00 1970
ID Date Icon Author Author Email Categoryup OS ELOG Version Subject
  363   Wed Jun 4 11:14:32 2003 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chCommentOther Re: rhis logbook
> I suggest to add an attributes  like  OS
> 
> MOptions OS = linux, windows2000, windowsXP¨, windows2003
> 
> to indicate on which version we are speaking

Good idea, I added a "ELOG Version" as well.
  364   Wed Jun 4 12:57:11 2003 Blink Etienne Van Caillieetienne.vancaillie@mba.beCommentOther Re: rhis logbook
> > I suggest to add an attributes  like  OS
> > 
> > MOptions OS = linux, windows2000, windowsXP¨, windows2003
> > 
> > to indicate on which version we are speaking
> 
> Good idea, I added a "ELOG Version" as well.

I suggest MOptions - people are lazy .... :)
by the way any possibilities to have 'multiple icons' ?
  365   Wed Jun 4 13:11:51 2003 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chCommentOther Re: rhis logbook
> I suggest MOptions - people are lazy .... :)

Not for the Version! I don't want to update this list on every release (:-(
Plus the list would get too long over time!

> by the way any possibilities to have 'multiple icons' ?

No, you have to use MOptions instead.
  446   Sun Oct 26 18:32:17 2003 Reply Dave Truesdelldavet@ttfn.comCommentOtherelog2.3.9Re: FreeBSD Install
> I got elog 2.3.9 running on FreeBSD 5.1 successfully,
> I compiled elog on a redhat box and then just copied over all the files to 
> the FreeBSD box and ELOG just ran with no issues.
> It's been running under heavy use for at least a month now.

FYI- the default "make" on FreeBSD is BSD, not GNU.

The easiest way to build elog on FreeBSD is to install "gmake" (via the port or
package) and type "gmake".  That's all it took for me to build a freshly
downloaded copy on 5.1 not 5 minutes ago.
  447   Tue Oct 28 22:40:28 2003 Agree Glevineg@med.govt.nzCommentOtherelog2.3.9Re: FreeBSD Install
Thanks for that mate, compiled elog on FreeBSD 5.1 myself no problems just like 
you said, great!

> 
> FYI- the default "make" on FreeBSD is BSD, not GNU.
> 
> The easiest way to build elog on FreeBSD is to install "gmake" (via the port or
> package) and type "gmake".  That's all it took for me to build a freshly
> downloaded copy on 5.1 not 5 minutes ago.
  452   Tue Nov 18 23:19:57 2003 Warning Justin Dietersenderak@yahoo.comCommentLinux2.3.9Update request for Admin Guide
Heya, I've been using elog for a year or so, with a proxy through Apache,
but recently I've ran into some trouble with my Apache config, where
spammers were using my incorrectly configured proxy to send spam.

I have
some requests for the Administrator's Guide: "Running elogd under Apache". 
I'm hoping a few little notes will save others the trouble I've gone
through. Neither of these are any fault of elog's or Apache's, but of my own
ignorance. (I am using elog 2.3.9, and Apache 2.something, if that matters)

1) When doing "ProxyPass ..." when setting up elog under Apache, do NOT put
"ProxyRequests On".  This is not needed, if it is enabled and not set up
correctly, it allows spammers to send spam via Apache's proxy.  More
information on this is here: http://www.apacheweek.com/issues/03-07-25,
about halfway down the page, under "Spammers use open Apache proxies"

Even though it doesn't mention ProxyRequests in the guide, I think there
should be a little side note mentioning that "ProxyRequests On" is NOT
needed, because I put it in, thinking it was - I am probably not the only one.

2) I have found that mod_proxy_http.c must be loaded in addition to
mod_proxy.c and mod_alias.c for the proxy to work, otherwise I get a 403
error.  I think this should be mentioned as well.
  454   Thu Nov 20 17:51:53 2003 Warning Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chCommentLinux2.3.9Re: Update request for Admin Guide
Thanks, I added a note into the admin guide.
  713   Wed Oct 6 06:14:36 2004 Agree Steve Jonessteve.jones@freescale.comCommentAll2.5.4Re: Enhanced "eLog Version" Variable
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!

> Sorry for that. The idea is that the -4 is the minor number between releases
> (mainly for bug fixes and impatient users (;-) ). I accidently overwrote the
> -4 version several times when testing a new RPM building scheme, but I promise
> to take more care in the future (:-)))
> 
> Having the CVS revision in the executable is however a good idea and I will
> put it in.
> 
> > 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 ;->
> > 
> > EX: 
> > #define VERSION "2.5.4-4"
> > BECOMES
> > #define VERSION "2.5.4-4-1.483" or something like that?
> > 
> > Just a thought.
> > 
> > Thanks
ELOG V3.1.5-2eba886