Demo Discussion
Forum Config Examples Contributions Vulnerabilities
  Discussion forum about ELOG, Page 644 of 808  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Icon Author Author Email Category OS ELOG Version Subject
  1383   Fri Aug 5 10:54:49 2005 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chInfoLinux2.6.0Re: "full" only changes color

Kees Bol wrote:
Stefan, I installed V2.6.0-beta3 and there is a (unwanted) difference. The Text field now appears in the summary-view despite the config specifies:

List Display = ID, Logdate, Author, Book, Chapter, Type, Subject

so in my opinion the text-field should not show up here.


If you do not want text display in the summary view, add

Summary lines = 0

into your config file.


Kees Bol wrote:
Another point: there was some discussion about v2.6.0-beta3 being slow.
I have v2.6.0-beta and v2.6.0-beta3 running side by side on the same server and notice also a big difference in speed, beta3 being much slower.


This is still a mystery to me, since on all machines I try the speed is fine. I'm still waiting for some debugging analysis from users which have this problem. If I cannot reproduce it, I cannot fix it.
  1382   Fri Aug 5 10:51:27 2005 Reply Kees Bolkees.bol@wur.nlInfoLinux2.6.0Re: "full" only changes color

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Kees Bol wrote:
I thougt when choosing the full-view the text would appear along with the other attributes.


That's how it is supposed to be. I tried your config file, added three entries, and got the behaviour documented in the attached images. To me everything looks fine.


Stefan, I installed V2.6.0-beta3 and there is a (unwanted) difference. The Text field now appears in the summary-view despite the config specifies:

List Display = ID, Logdate, Author, Book, Chapter, Type, Subject

so in my opinion the text-field should not show up here.

Now the full-view indeed shows the complete texts.

I also attached the complete config-file because perhaps I overlook some details.


Another point: there was some discussion about v2.6.0-beta3 being slow.
I have v2.6.0-beta and v2.6.0-beta3 running side by side on the same server and notice also a big difference in speed, beta3 being much slower.
Attachment 1: elogd.cfg.txt
 cat elogd.cfg
[global]
port = 8080

Logfile = /home/elog2/log/elogd.log
Logging level = 3

SMTP host = net.wur.nl

Password file = /home/elog2/global.pwd
Self register = 0
Admin user = bol001

Deny New = Guest, guest
Deny Edit = Guest, guest


Subst on reply subject = Re: $subject

;Guest menu commands = Find, Last 10, Login, Help
;Menu commands = New, Edit, Delete, Reply, Find, Last 10, Change password, Logout, Help


Message width = 100
Message height = 20
Default encoding = 1
;Entries per page = 30
Use Lock = 1

Time format = %d-%b-%y %H:%M
Date format = %d-%b-%y

[forum]
Theme = default
;Theme = bubble

Attributes = Author, Type, Subject
Required Attributes = Type, Subject
;Type Logdate = datetime
;Preset Logdate = $date
Preset Author = $long_name
;Locked Attributes = Author, Logdate
Locked Attributes = Author

Options Type = Question, Configuration, Problem, Info, Other

List Display = ID, Date, Author, Type, Subject
Thread display = $Subject,  posted by $Author on $Date

# onzeker of dit wel werkt
;Format Date = 0, attribname, attribvalue, 16, 16

;Guest menu commands = Back, Find, Login, Help
;Guest find menu commands = Find, Login, Help
Menu commands = Back, New, Edit, Delete, Reply, Find, Last 10, Change password, Logout, Help

Quick filter = Date, Type
Summary lines = 0

Start page = ?rsort=Date

; alleen eigen messages editen
Restrict edit = 1

[Logbook]
Theme = default
;Theme = bubble
;CSS = compact.css

Default encoding = 1
Message width = 180
Message height = 20

Page title = Logbook FB/ICT/SenS

Attributes = Logdate, Author, Book, Chapter, Type, Subject
Required Attributes = Book, Chapter, Type, Subject
Type Logdate = datetime
Preset Logdate = $date
Preset Author = $long_name
Locked Attributes = Author

Options Book = Windows{2}, Linux{1}, Backup{3}, Mail{4}, DNS{5}, Websites{web}
{1} Options Chapter = Servers{s}, Oracle{def}, Other{Def}
{2} Options Chapter = Servers{s}, MOM{def}, Other{def}
{3} Options Chapter = Netbackup{nb}, Netvault{nv}, Other{def}
{4} Options Chapter = Exchange{def}, Postfix{def}, Other{def}
{5} Options Chapter = ns[12].wur.nl{def}, MenAndMice{def}, AD{def}, Domains{dom}, Other{def}
{6} Options Chapter = Proxy{def}, Apache{def}, IIS{def}, Other{def}

{dom} Options Type = Documentation, Info, New, Removed, Changed, Other
{nb} Options Type = Documentation, Info, Monitoring, Installation, Problem, Todo, Other
{nv} Options Type = Documentation, Info, Monitoring, Installation, Problem, Todo, Other
{s}  Options Type = Documentation, Info, Monitoring, Installation, General, Hardware, Network, Software, ToDo, Other
{web} Options Type = Documentation, Info, New, Removed, Changed, Other
{def} Options Type = Documentation, Info, Monitoring, Installation, Configuration, Problem, Problem Fixed,  Routine, ToDo, Other


Options Chapter = AD, Apache, Exchange, IIS, MenAndMice, MOM, Netbackup, Netvault, ns, Oracle, Postfix, Proxy, Servers, Other

Options Type = Configuration, Documentation, General, Hardware, Info, Monitoring, Network, Problem, Routine, Software,  ToDo, Other


List Display = ID, Logdate, Author, Book, Chapter, Type, Subject

;Guest menu commands = Back, Find, Login, Help
;Guest find menu commands = Find, Login, Help
Menu commands = Back, New, Edit, Delete, Reply, Find, Last 10, Change password, Logout, Help

Deny New = Guest, guest
Deny Edit = Guest, guest
;
Start page = ?rsort=Date
Quick filter = Logdate, Chapter, Type
;
; alleen eigen messages editen
Restrict edit = 1

  1381   Fri Aug 5 10:00:00 2005 Reply Kees Bolkees.bol@wur.nlInfoLinux2.6.0Re: "full" only changes color

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Kees Bol wrote:
I thougt when choosing the full-view the text would appear along with the other attributes.


That's how it is supposed to be. I tried your config file, added three entries, and got the behaviour documented in the attached images. To me everything looks fine.


Stefan, the output you see I expected to see with my logbook too but I don't.
I will upgrade to V2.6.0-beta3, perhaps that solves the problem.
  1380   Fri Aug 5 09:19:02 2005 Reply Emiliano GabrielliAlberT@SuperAlberT.itBug reportLinux 2.5.9+r16Re: problem with list display attribute

Stefan Ritt wrote:

John Habermann wrote:
I not sure if this has been found and fixed as I did find something to do with the list display attribute in the forums but wasn't sure if it was the same thing.

There seems to be a bug with the List Display attribute in that it drops the last attribute of the list. So in my example if I want to display the Subject in my list I have to add a dummy attribute after it otherwise the Subject will not be displayed. The comma after Subject is not enough, but all you have to do is to add 1 letter and then you will see the subject in List view. If you don't all I see is the Date and Author fields and then the Text field in my Summary view in the log book.

List Display = Date,Author,Subject,t

I am running elog 2.5.9+r1674-1 on Debian sarge.


I tried with the current 2.6.0-beta3 and it worked fine. Can you send me your full elogd.cfg in order to reproduce the problem?

it is the pippo bug...
it was fixed in revision 1.675, just the next he was using...

it is discussed in elog:1170
  1379   Fri Aug 5 02:27:15 2005 Angy Chris Greengreenc@fnal.govBug reportLinux2.6.0-CVSTop Groups, Show Top Groups, password file and Protect Selection page have nasty interaction
Hi,

Just as our ELOG went into production, I tripped over a couple of related (I think) bugs.

First, the easy one: line 21368 of src/elogd.c has a compile warning which looks non-benign. I fixed it in my local copy with:

Index: elogd.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /usr/local/cvsroot/elog/src/elogd.c,v
retrieving revision 1.739
diff -r1.739 elogd.c
21368,21369c21368
< sprintf(str, "?fail=1", user);
< redirect(lbs, str);
---
> redirect(lbs, "?fail=1");

Regardless (ie if I use the original CVS code or the patched version), a hard-to trace problem occurs with my configuration whereby users are denied access after password entry at the logbook selection page (even when details are verifiably correct), and users are dropped through to the next (non-protected) Top Group page. This problem goes away if "Protect Selection Page" is turned off.

A kind of "shadow" of this problem occurs if you create a new logbook from the Change Config File page, whereby after creating the new logbook one is dropped through to the next Top Group's selection page after saving the configuration (and the url has ?fail=1 added to it, althoguh line 21368 above is hardly the only place where this could have occurred).

I think all these things are linked. I'd be grateful if you could review this section of this code for possible causes of these problems. While we can operate for now with non-logged-in users able to see our list of logbooks, that is not something we want for the long term.

Thanks for your help,
Chris.
  1378   Fri Aug 5 02:14:22 2005 Reply Carl Shireycarl.shirey@pw.utc.comQuestionLinux2.6Re: Login twice

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Carl Shirey wrote:
Yes Here is a copy of the elog.cfg.


I tried with your config file and it worked fine. So can you tell me:

  • At what URL do you access your logbook? Do you just type http://localhost:8080 or anything else
  • Do you use any proxy or stunnel?
  • What is the URL in your browser showing on the first and second login?

You might want to consider to put a
URL = http://<your host>:8080/
into your config file.


Thanks
Your questions that you ask me help me out.
What I was doing was typing in the URL was http://pdls:8080 and it took me the pass down log. When I went to login into Elog took me back to the log but the URL read http://pdls.pwfl.com:8080 so when I log in the second time I was to be the edit mode. So I guess I should have typing in the URL http://pdls.pwfl.com:8080.

Thanks again for your help
  1377   Fri Aug 5 01:15:23 2005 Reply Chris Greengreenc@fnal.gov   Re: Notify email recipient of attachments without including?

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Chris Green wrote:
Hi,

Our elog is going to be taking some large attachments. I've disabled the attachments from going out in the email, but I'd like email recipients to know that the post has attachments associated with it. Is there a mechanism to do this already, or would it be an enhancement? I'm looking for something like:

Email Notify Attachments = 0 | 1 | 2

Where 0 = no notification,
1 = number only,
2 = list

... independent of whether attachments are included with the email itself.

Thanks,
Chris.


I added Email Format = 64 for only attachment names. So you could set Email Format = 111 to get everything except the full attachments.


Thanks for this. Will verify as soon as someone posts to the (now live) logbook.

Chris.
  1376   Fri Aug 5 01:13:13 2005 Reply Chris Greengreenc@fnal.govQuestionLinux2.6.0b3Re: 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.
ELOG V3.1.5-3fb85fa6