How do I make selection page show only list of logbooks that logged on user has access to? 

Right now, say I have 4 logbooks, and I have access to 2 of them. I turned on Protect Selection page = 1. So when I go to home page, I need to logon first, then I am given selection page. I am given list of 4 logbooks, I can only click into 2, which is expected.  

Instead of given list of 4 logbooks, I would like to know if there is a way to make selection page only contains 2 logbooks which I have access to?

I don't think there is a good secure way so far, but would like to have your opinion. 

If I want user to create logbook for themselves, what's the best way to do it? I guess Execute $attribute = <command> may work, have it write to cfg file, but obviously it impose security problem. Is there a good and secure way to allow user to create logbook themselves?

Dear all,

Is it possible to have a dynamic "preset text" option?

I would like to switch the template file depending on the attribute value. (Of course this attribute values will be a fixed list of options, not extandable). 

I see there one difficulty, that: if user already started editing the text body, he could lose this data. But I think that this could be left on user responsibility to take care about it.

Another option could be to always insert the template text on the very beginning of the text body.

Is this feature implemented, or maybe someone have done it by changing the server code?

Cheers

Hi,

I hope I'm not missing the blindingly obvious here, but I have an issue with time and date formats

Extract from my elog.cfg file:


Time format = %a %d %b %y
Date format = %d %b
Thread display = $Ticket: $System, $entry time. ($message id). $status
Preset text = [$date]
Prepend on reply = [$date] \n

I can point to places in the syntax doc where each of these lines are given.

As for the results, the thread display is (for example):

T00001: Computer, Wed 29 Aug 12. (1). Problem

However, what I get at the top of the text box in starting a new entry or replying to a previous one is

[Wed 29 Aug 12]

whereas I expected to get

[29 Aug]

Putting $date instead of $entry time in the Thread display line makes (the by now expected) no difference

I cannot see where I'm going wrong.  

TIA 

David.

 I haven't found anything in the forums about this. Apologies if its a duplicate.

I am fairly familiar with ELog, use it for multiple purposes on 5 different Virtual Servers at work. 

Currently looking to do some updates to one of the instances with the Date Type setting.

We have 17,000 entries all which have had manual entries for a Date Attribute for the last year and 8 months.

Due to regular entry errors on part of our contractors using it, (Eg: using "Aug" instead of "08", or using "-" instead of "/"), I want to change over to using the date type attribute (Type <attribute> = Date).

However the problem i found, the moment i save this in the config, and go to the list of entries, the date has changed on all of the entries to 12/31/1969. Which is BAD for our operation. So after removing the Type Date Setting the dates go back to normal.

Is there anyway to retain those dates so they display as they are and then only new entries would fall under the new date type setting?

Syntax manual didn't help much for this issue.

 Hi All, 

 maybe I missed something in the configuration, but how do I get this nice editor for HTML like the one available on this forum?

Thanks a lot for advice.

I upgraded my system, including the version of Firefox.

I normally view the topic in Threaded Collapsed mode, right click on the entry I want to reply to, to open a new
Tab.  However, I made a mistake an opened a new Window, as the two 'open' modes in Firefox swapped around.
But no worry, I thought, made my reply as usual.

However, when refreshing the topic afterwards, seemingly randomly distributed throughout the topic were
additional lines, with the latest entry showing up emboldened (but not as a clickable link), and the only
difference being the ID number which showed as 0 (zero).

Deleting the reply only caused the previous reply to show up randomly etc.

In effect, the latest entry is (randomly?) scattered throughout the topic - even in between entries older than
any in that thread, so it's not individial entries in that thread showing up.

The only way to get rid of it was to erase the whole directory, and re-install from backup (which, as it was the
first entry since the new installation, wasn't painful).  It's been fine since - but only so long as I open a
thread in a new tab, and not in a new Window.

I guess the real question is just what is added to some file - perhaps the .cfg file? - that using a separate
window causes this behavioir?  Any whay only as a new window, and given how elog is supposed to work on many
computers, why on this stand-alone computer running two sets of the same browser?

It happened once before at the end of last year during a regression backwards owing to the newer computer
failing and turning back to an older one with older OS and older firefox, where I did the same thing (in
reverse).  As I didn't investigate at that time, I still have the mystery line showing up in that topic.

Sorry this is a bit rambling, but its very hard to describe!

 We have multiple logbooks. Each user is admin user for his/her own logbook. 

I want user be able to modify config file, but no access to user setting, such as see user list, change password, new user, remove user. 

[logbook1]
Admin user = user1
Login user = user1, user2
Allow Config = user1
List Menu commands = Admin, Config

user1 click on Admin, it opens config file, when user1 click on save, user1 is brought to Config page, which has select user list on top, Change password, Remove user, New user buttons on bottom. Is there a way that admin user has access to config file, but no access to user info at all (not even presented to them).  Is there a way after user1 click save, page doesn't go to that config page?

I could put 
Deny Change password =
Deny Remove user
Deny New user

so when user1 click on those buttons, user1 will get command not allowed. However I would rather have user1 not even see that page.