| ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
|
1622
|
Tue Jan 24 08:11:13 2006 |
 | Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | | 2.6.0b5 | Re: Quicklink does not work for one field |
| mark james wrote: |
| mark james wrote: |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| mark james wrote: | | I am not so bold as to log this as a bug but one of my Quicklink fields just do not work. |
Sorry my late reply, but now I have fixed this problem. The update is under SVN and will be contained in the next release. |
Thanks for that. I am now using ver V2.6.1-1622. So I guess that doesn't qualify as a "next release". I wonder if there is anything I could do to work around the issue?
Mark |
In fact now the dropdown seems to be working but when I 'tick' an entry, it is not being written to the ascii file. |
Can you try V2.6.1-1634? I fixed several issues with ticking entries coming from "MOptions" lists. |
|
1634
|
Fri Jan 27 13:50:10 2006 |
| mark james | mark@majames.com | Question | | 2.6.0b5 | Re: Quicklink does not work for one field |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| mark james wrote: |
| mark james wrote: |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| mark james wrote: | | I am not so bold as to log this as a bug but one of my Quicklink fields just do not work. |
Sorry my late reply, but now I have fixed this problem. The update is under SVN and will be contained in the next release. |
Thanks for that. I am now using ver V2.6.1-1622. So I guess that doesn't qualify as a "next release". I wonder if there is anything I could do to work around the issue?
Mark |
In fact now the dropdown seems to be working but when I 'tick' an entry, it is not being written to the ascii file. |
Can you try V2.6.1-1634? I fixed several issues with ticking entries coming from "MOptions" lists. |
OK. But where do I get this from? The "latest version of 19 Jan is still 1622. |
|
1635
|
Fri Jan 27 13:52:34 2006 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | | 2.6.0b5 | Re: Quicklink does not work for one field |
| mark james wrote: | | OK. But where do I get this from? The "latest version of 19 Jan is still 1622. |
If you can compile it yourself, you get it from Subversion (see here). Otherwise you have to wait for the next release. |
|
1390
|
Fri Aug 5 16:17:00 2005 |
 | Chris Green | greenc@fnal.gov | Question | Linux | 2.6.0b4 | How does RSS interact with password protection? |
Can I have an RSS feed to a protected log book? Does it also require authentication, or does it bypass it? If it bypasses it, how do I disable RSS?
Thanks,
Chris. |
|
1391
|
Fri Aug 5 16:48:56 2005 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Linux | 2.6.0b4 | Re: How does RSS interact with password protection? |
| Chris Green wrote: | Can I have an RSS feed to a protected log book? Does it also require authentication, or does it bypass it? If it bypasses it, how do I disable RSS?
Thanks,
Chris. |
I added this topic to the FAQs at http://midas.psi.ch/elog/faq.html#15 |
|
1350
|
Wed Jul 27 17:30:38 2005 |
| Chris Green | greenc@fnal.gov | Question | Linux | 2.6.0b3 | Email subject garbaged when set? |
Hi,
So I'm using the CVS version now since I was hoping this would be fixed. If I set the email subject explicitly, viz:
Use Email Subject = [BooNE-ELOG] New submission to $logbook from $Author
The email I get has:
Subject:
=?ISO-8859-1?B?W0Jvb05FLUVMT0ddIE5ldyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHRvIENoYXJnZWQgQ3Vyc
mVudCBQaSBQbHVzIGZyb20gQ2hyaXMgR3JlZW4=?=
... which isn't particularly illuminating.
Advice appreciated.
Thanks,
Chris. |
|
1375
|
Thu Aug 4 22:59:12 2005 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Linux | 2.6.0b3 | Re: Email subject garbaged when set? |
| Chris Green wrote: | The email I get has:
Subject:
=?ISO-8859-1?B?W0Jvb05FLUVMT0ddIE5ldyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHRvIENoYXJnZWQgQ3Vyc
mVudCBQaSBQbHVzIGZyb20gQ2hyaXMgR3JlZW4=?=
... which isn't particularly illuminating. |
This is the BASE64 encoding of the subject. It was discussed here and I implemented it according to RFC2047. All subjects I receive look fine in Outlook and Thunderbird, but not under Pine, which apparently does not implement the RFC correctly. One could of course put a switch into elog to encode it or not. But as soon as you want to send some non-ASCII characters (like the Norwegian as described in the thread mentioned above) you have a problem. Maybe you can configure your email client correctly to interprete the encoded subject? |
|
1376
|
Fri Aug 5 01:13:13 2005 |
| Chris Green | greenc@fnal.gov | Question | Linux | 2.6.0b3 | Re: Email subject garbaged when set? |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Chris Green wrote: | The email I get has:
Subject:
=?ISO-8859-1?B?W0Jvb05FLUVMT0ddIE5ldyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHRvIENoYXJnZWQgQ3Vyc
mVudCBQaSBQbHVzIGZyb20gQ2hyaXMgR3JlZW4=?=
... which isn't particularly illuminating. |
This is the BASE64 encoding of the subject. It was discussed here and I implemented it according to RFC2047. All subjects I receive look fine in Outlook and Thunderbird, but not under Pine, which apparently does not implement the RFC correctly. One could of course put a switch into elog to encode it or not. But as soon as you want to send some non-ASCII characters (like the Norwegian as described in the thread mentioned above) you have a problem. Maybe you can configure your email client correctly to interprete the encoded subject? |
Apparently the pine people think they're implementing it correctly. Indeed the default subject, "[ISO-8859-1] New ELOG entry" appears just fine. The one for membership confirmation, and anything set in Use Email Subject, however, is borked as above. Maybe the pine bug is something that can be worked around with something simple (like spaces after the ISO spec, or something? Some things work just fine, as I said.
Thanks,
Chris. |