Hello @all,

for a logbook I have also to set up a guest access. As I want to have a login page first opening the logbook,  I created a second logbook entry in the elog.cfg that points to the same subdir as the original logbook. The idea of this guest access is, that users who have no login rights can read selected items with selected attributes. Therefor I restricted the guest account with all available "Guest"-commands in the elog.cfg.

But this is not sufficient. Let's suppose I have an attribute called 'Accessibility' with options 'public' and 'private'. What I am searching for is a filter command for the list display, i.e. if an entry has the accessibility flag 'public', a guest sees this entry in the list and can access it. But if the entry has the accessibility flag private, the entry should not be displayed for guests but for users, that are logged in.

I read the administrator guide carefully, but I didn't found a command that provides for that. Does such a filtering command for the list exist? If not, is it possible to implement one?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Bayer

ELOG seems to enter a loop when you do certain opeations on certain messages: I moved a message to a different logbook and the deamon just gets stuck.

If I restart the daemon, the message was in fact moved: I can move it back to its original destination without problems.

I started in GDB and break with ctrl-C when the process gets stuck, to be told :

Program received signal SIGINT, Interrupt.
0x000000000040a968 in find_thread_head ()

I then made a core dump.

I put the files here: http://cern.ch/poulsen2/elog-error-report-110430.zip (they are too big to upload).

I get into the same problem in other circumstances such as when opening some threads (maybe because they contain "Reply-to" references to non-existing messages, but I have problems reproducing this on the test installation.

I should maybe also submit the incriminating thread.

Soren

I am in the process of upgrading from 2.6.0 to 2.9.0.  I am installing it on a windows 2008 r2 server which is 64 bit.  I am having a few issues and am just wondering if Windows 2008 R2 is support with version 2.9.0.  Is there anything I need to know about the installation other than just run the exe file?  So far I have run the exe file and installed the software, the service is running, however I cannot get into the application.  I do not have IIS installed, it does mention it in the installation documentation, is this a requirement?  Any hints or ideas at this point would be appreciated.  I am close I just need that last tweek.  Thanks

I am in the process of upgrading from 2.6.0 to 2.9.0.  I am installing it on a windows 2008 r2 server which is 64 bit.  I am having a few issues and am just wondering if Windows 2008 R2 is support with version 2.9.0.  Is there anything I need to know about the installation other than just run the exe file?  So far I have run the exe file and installed the software, the service is running, however I cannot get into the application.  I do not have IIS installed, it does mention it in the installation documentation, is this a requirement?  Any hints or ideas at this point would be appreciated.  I am close I just need that last tweek.  Thanks

 Hi,

I have a MacOSX 10.6.7 laptop that periodically synchronizes my logbook with that on a Debian linux web server.  Both instances of ELOG are 2.9.0-2396.

When I create a new entry on the laptop, the indicated time stamp is correct.  When I click Synchronize on the laptop, the entry that gets mirrored to the Debian server has a time stamp exactly one hour earlier (in the past) on the Debian side.

Likewise, when I create a new entry on the Debian server, the indicated time stamp is correct.  When I click Synchronize on the laptop, the entry that gets mirrored from the Debian machine to the laptop has a time stamp that is exactly one hour in the future on the laptop.

This appears to be due to an incorrect handling of times with regard to "summer" (daylight savings) and "standard" time when mirroring between these two different machines.

Is there a straightforward workaround to immunize against this sensitivity?

Thanks!

Andreas

Does anyone know whether ELOG has limit number of entries or it can create new entries as many as it can go?  Thanks.

Hi,

when I try to edit an entry of my ELOG, the display shows the editor window blank, without all the previous content of the entry, and it is not possibile to write in it. It worked since yesterday, when ELOG tried to save a new entry but the disk was full. ELOG was srewed up. I deleted the buggy entry and now I can display all the previuos entries, but I cannot edit anymore... Please help!

Sara

Is it possible to have an attachment to an entry in a different directory to the working directory of the logbook being used?

By which I mean, if you have in logbook hidden the attachment files

../logbooks/hidden/110705_235520_whatthis-0.png
../logbooks/hidden/110705_235520_whatthis.pdf

that an entry in another logbook, public, can use the entries in hidden to show them (and do everything that you can do with an attachment)
without making another copy in public?

I see that if, working in public, you attach the .pdf file in hidden, the files get copied across as

../logbooks/public/110705_235520_whatthis-0.png
../logbooks/public/110705_235520_whatthis.pdf

that is, with the original (hidden) timestamp, and no second time stamp superimposed.  From which you can gather I've been playing around, manually editing a yymmdda.log file to try and get the result I want, even if for the moment it cannot be done via elog; but without success, although there were some bizarre interpretations by the elog program of the edited yymmdda.log file, depending upon what I tried.

For one entry, it is of course no big deal, copying the files into the public directory, but if you are dealing with multiple huge entries, it does seem wasteful of HD space

But my reason for this is that hidden has restricted access, whereas public has general access.  The attachments themselves are not restricted, but comments, history etc around them in the restricted access logbook should not become available to the general viewer.