Demo Discussion
Forum Config Examples Contributions Vulnerabilities
  Discussion forum about ELOG, Page 414 of 808  Not logged in ELOG logo
 Find |  Login |  Help 
 Full | Summary | Threaded | Hide attachments  Show only new entries    6457 Entries 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 413, 414, 415 ... 806, 807, 808   Next  
ID Date Icon Author Author Email Category OS ELOG Versiondown Subject
  66511   Tue Aug 11 10:07:08 2009 Reply David PilgramDavid.Pilgram@epost.org.ukCommentLinux2.7.7-2251Re: Comment on: Alphabetize Quick Option filter
Thanks Stefan!  Works great.

> Ok, that makes sense, so I changed it to
> 
> Sort Attribute Options Status = 1
> 
> as you suggested.
> 
> > (For some reason I could not add this in Dennis's thread.)
> > 
> > I like this new feature, BUT
> > 
> > I happen to have two Options:   Options System, and Options Status.
> > 
> > System are a very few items, whereas Status has a long list, which, like Dennis's example, can be added to. 
> > Keeping the latter in alpha order is great, but it's a shame that the cost is that Options System are also
> > sorted alphabetically, whereas it has a natural order which it would be preferable to keep - for example (and
> > this is made up)
> > 
> > Options System: 3.1, NT, 2000, XP, Vista
> > 
> > where the natural order here is chronological.
> > 
> > Perhaps the configuration file option could be more specific, for example
> > 
> > Sort attribute Options Status = 1
> > 
> > which would then NOT sort Options System.  If both are needed to be sorted, both should be specified, or back to
> > the original syntax which defaults to sort *all* Options.
  66515   Tue Aug 11 17:46:33 2009 Reply Dennis Seitzdseitz@berkeley.eduCommentLinux2.7.7-2251Re: Comment on: Alphabetize Quick Option filter
Yes, many thanks, Stefan, from me, too! It's really great that you respond so quickly to requests and suggestions.

And thanks to David for the fine tuning, great suggestion.

Dennis

> Thanks Stefan!  Works great.
> 
> > Ok, that makes sense, so I changed it to
> > 
> > Sort Attribute Options Status = 1
> > 
> > as you suggested.
> > 
> > > (For some reason I could not add this in Dennis's thread.)
> > > 
> > > I like this new feature, BUT
> > > 
> > > I happen to have two Options:   Options System, and Options Status.
> > > 
> > > System are a very few items, whereas Status has a long list, which, like Dennis's example, can be added to. 
> > > Keeping the latter in alpha order is great, but it's a shame that the cost is that Options System are also
> > > sorted alphabetically, whereas it has a natural order which it would be preferable to keep - for example (and
> > > this is made up)
> > > 
> > > Options System: 3.1, NT, 2000, XP, Vista
> > > 
> > > where the natural order here is chronological.
> > > 
> > > Perhaps the configuration file option could be more specific, for example
> > > 
> > > Sort attribute Options Status = 1
> > > 
> > > which would then NOT sort Options System.  If both are needed to be sorted, both should be specified, or back to
> > > the original syntax which defaults to sort *all* Options.
  66492   Wed Aug 5 01:07:04 2009 Warning Richard Stamperr.stamper@rl.ac.ukBug reportAll2.7.7-2246init_resize sometimes not defined

Under some circumstances the New/Edit entry screen can invoke the init_resize() function in the onload handler for the <body> tag, but the init_resize() function is not defined.  In my case there is a log where the encoding is plain text (Default encoding = 1) and the message height is restricted (Message height = 4).  Creating or editing entries in this log generates warnings in the Firefox error console and alert boxes in IE about init_resize being undefined.

I think there is some missing logic.  In revision 2246 of elogd.c

  • at line 9924, if enc_selected = 1 then init_resize() is included in the onload handler, but
  • at line 9801, if enc_selected = 1 but at least one of the  "Message height" or "Message width" attributes is set then the code defining init_resize() is not include

I think you need to duplicate the checks on the Message height and Message width attributes at lines 9924, so that the init_resize() function is only included when defined.

Richard S

  66493   Wed Aug 5 13:36:44 2009 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chBug reportAll2.7.7-2246Re: init_resize sometimes not defined

Richard Stamper wrote:

Under some circumstances the New/Edit entry screen can invoke the init_resize() function in the onload handler for the <body> tag, but the init_resize() function is not defined.  In my case there is a log where the encoding is plain text (Default encoding = 1) and the message height is restricted (Message height = 4).  Creating or editing entries in this log generates warnings in the Firefox error console and alert boxes in IE about init_resize being undefined.

I think there is some missing logic.  In revision 2246 of elogd.c

  • at line 9924, if enc_selected = 1 then init_resize() is included in the onload handler, but
  • at line 9801, if enc_selected = 1 but at least one of the  "Message height" or "Message width" attributes is set then the code defining init_resize() is not include

I think you need to duplicate the checks on the Message height and Message width attributes at lines 9924, so that the init_resize() function is only included when defined.

Richard S

Perfect! Not only your analysis but also your suggested solution. I implemented that in revision 2249.

Stefan 

  66519   Mon Aug 24 21:47:14 2009 Entry Allenbastss@rit.eduBug reportLinux2.7.7-2246Fix text prevents user from editing text during creation, instead of just edit

When we set Fix text = 1, according to the syntax, this should prevent users from modifying the text field during an edit, but it looks like it is blocking access at both time of edit and creation, meaning you can never add anything to it.  Is that the intended functionality?

  66520   Tue Aug 25 21:08:51 2009 Entry Arno TeunisseA.teeling3@chello.nlQuestionWindows2.7.7-2246fckeditor update

Hello

Just a few fckeditor related questions. How do elog versions and fckeditor versions relate. ?

Can I just drop another version of the fckeditor over an other version?  What things should I consider when doing so ?

thanks for you're time.

 

  66521   Mon Aug 31 11:22:20 2009 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chQuestionWindows2.7.7-2246Re: fckeditor update

Arno Teunisse wrote:

Hello

Just a few fckeditor related questions. How do elog versions and fckeditor versions relate. ?

Can I just drop another version of the fckeditor over an other version?  What things should I consider when doing so ?

thanks for you're time.

The relation is not very "stong". In the past I updated between major version of fckeditor without chaning any elog code, so just give it a try. 

  66525   Thu Sep 3 21:55:52 2009 Question Gerhard Schneidergs@ilsb.tuwien.ac.atQuestionLinux2.7.7-2246chain.crt
Like many educational institutions we get "educational certificates" that are chain certificates..

With apache the full certificate chain is working as expected..

For elog I copied the appropriate files to server.crt and server.key

Netscape 3 is happy with that setup, Internet Explorer and Opera are mentioning the open certificate chain.

When I tried to copy the file known as SSLCACertificateFile in Apache to chain.crt elogd does not longer work and 

openssl s_client -showcerts -connect <myserver>:<elogd_port>

only shows: 

CONNECTED(00000003)
25523:error:14077410:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_SERVER_HELLO:sslv3 alert handshake failure:s23_clnt.c:562:

What do I do wrong?

Gerhard Schneider
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 413, 414, 415 ... 806, 807, 808   Next  
ELOG V3.1.5-3fb85fa6