Demo Discussion
Forum Config Examples Contributions Vulnerabilities
  Discussion forum about ELOG, Page 410 of 808  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Icon Author Author Email Category OS ELOG Versiondown Subject
  66579   Fri Nov 6 12:49:22 2009 Question Fabio Rossirossi.f@inwind.itQuestionLinux2.7.7.1width of the Text column in the summary list view

I have "Summary lines = 1" in the config file. The first line visualized in the summary list, in the Text column, is truncated. I'm using the default style.

Which is the way to set the number of character displayed?

  66580   Fri Nov 6 13:46:38 2009 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chQuestionLinux2.7.7.1Re: width of the Text column in the summary list view

Fabio Rossi wrote:

I have "Summary lines = 1" in the config file. The first line visualized in the summary list, in the Text column, is truncated. I'm using the default style.

Which is the way to set the number of character displayed?

I added a new parameter

Summary line length = x

for you. This is included in SVN revision 2262 (if you can compile it yourself) and will be contained in the next release.

  66581   Fri Nov 6 18:08:20 2009 Reply Fabio Rossirossi.f@inwind.itQuestionLinux2.7.7.1Re: width of the Text column in the summary list view

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Fabio Rossi wrote:

I have "Summary lines = 1" in the config file. The first line visualized in the summary list, in the Text column, is truncated. I'm using the default style.

Which is the way to set the number of character displayed?

I added a new parameter

Summary line length = x

for you. This is included in SVN revision 2262 (if you can compile it yourself) and will be contained in the next release.

I have already tested your patch backporting the change to 2.7.7.1. It works like a charm.

Thank you very much!

  66633   Tue Dec 1 14:20:04 2009 Question Terry Shuckt.lshuck@gmail.comQuestionWindows2.7.7-2271default Status descending

Is there a way to configure ELOG to default to the Status column in descending order rather than the Date in descending order?

Thanks

  66634   Tue Dec 1 14:22:28 2009 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chQuestionWindows2.7.7-2271Re: default Status descending

Terry Shuck wrote:

Is there a way to configure ELOG to default to the Status column in descending order rather than the Date in descending order?

Thanks

Sort attributes = Status

... as written in the manual. 

  66636   Tue Dec 1 15:11:19 2009 Reply Terry Shuckt.lshuck@gmail.comQuestionWindows2.7.7-2271Re: default Status descending

Thanks for the quick response. This works. I noticed that the Dates aren't descending, is there a way to have the dates descending while sorting Status?

Thanks again!

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Terry Shuck wrote:

Is there a way to configure ELOG to default to the Status column in descending order rather than the Date in descending order?

Thanks

Sort attributes = Status

... as written in the manual. 

 

  66637   Wed Dec 2 11:57:09 2009 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chQuestionWindows2.7.7-2271Re: default Status descending

Terry Shuck wrote:

Thanks for the quick response. This works. I noticed that the Dates aren't descending, is there a way to have the dates descending while sorting Status?

Thanks again!

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Terry Shuck wrote:

Is there a way to configure ELOG to default to the Status column in descending order rather than the Date in descending order?

Thanks

Sort attributes = Status

... as written in the manual. 

 

For this you need

Sort attributes = Status, Date

which however only works from version 2.7.8 on. 

  66625   Mon Nov 23 11:53:22 2009 Question David PilgramDavid.Pilgram@epost.org.ukQuestionLinux2.7.7-2266Attachments and images of attachments
Hi Stefan,

I attached a 12 page (22kB) pdf file - no images - to an entry, but elog only converted the first 8 pages to
images (.png).  This is reproducable, i.e. a different small multipage pdf file produced the same number of images.

The size of the pdf file does not seem to be a problem, a single page pdf file with a lot of images in it
attached as expected.

Is this correct, or a defined limitation?
ELOG V3.1.5-3fb85fa6