Demo Discussion
Forum Config Examples Contributions Vulnerabilities
  Discussion forum about ELOG, Page 655 of 808  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Icon Author Author Email Category OS ELOG Version Subjectdown
  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.
  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.
  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.
  1387   Fri Aug 5 14:30:52 2005 Agree Kees Bolkees.bol@wur.nlInfoLinux2.6.0Re: "full" only changes color

Stefan Ritt wrote:

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.



After upgrading to v2.6.0-beta4 everything works fine now.
Thanks for your help
  67522   Mon Jun 3 15:49:33 2013 Reply Martin Rongenmartin.rongen@rwth-aachen.deInfoLinux2.6.0Re: "full" only changes color

Kees Bol wrote:
Hi,
I have the strange problem that when changing to "full"-diplaymode the output looks the same as with "summary", only the color is different. The texts don't appear.
Any idea what can cause this behaviour?

thanks
Kees Bol



I now have the same problem in 2.9.2. Attached please find the elogd.cfg

Best regards
Martin
  Draft   Tue Apr 12 09:06:49 2022 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chQuestionWindows3.1.4 (latest)Re: "User stamp" icon like Time Stamp in Body
<p>&nbsp;</p>

<table align="center" cellspacing="1" style="border:1px solid #486090; width:98%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color:#486090">Gys Wuyts wrote:</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="background-color:#FFFFB0">
<p>Hello,</p>

<p>Is there a possibility to use like the time stamp a user stamp: by clicking the button in the main text entry it adds the username, just like the time stamp button does:&nbsp;Tue Apr 12 08:58:46 2022 ?</p>

<p>I searched but I&#39;m not sure how this would be correctly named.</p>

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>G</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

Tue Apr 12 09:06:49 2022
  521   Fri Apr 2 02:41:36 2004 Question PJ Meyerpjm@pjmeyer.orgQuestionWindows1.35 to 2.51Re: "Upgrading" from 1.35 to 2.52 fails
tuens out that the first log file was causing the problem. Elconv would just hang 
on trying to convert it. renamed it, reran elconv, reload service and 2.51 elogd 
and all was working as it should.


> Have a working copy of 1.35 running on NT4 server.
> Went to upgrade to latest version.
> Stopped service, installed the 2.52 version, restarted service and when 
> trying to connect get nothing but server not found, dns errors, etc.
> Copy back the 1.35 elogd.exe and everything is fine - I can connect and add 
> entries to log.
> Copy 2.52 elogd.exe and nothing.
> 
> So being the bright boy, I unistalled E-log, went through the registry and 
> yanked everything out that referenced ELOGD, rebooted, installed 2.52, made 
> the necessary registry changes, started service and nothing. 
> 
> Stopped service and copied 1.35 Elogd.exe back into folder, started service, 
> and everything works.
> 
> Any ideas on why 1.35 works like a charm but 2.52 won't? I've tried stepping 
> back to 2.10 version before giving up.
> 
> This is a server that is patched to latest and runs quite well with 1.35.
  1570   Fri Dec 23 09:07:14 2005 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chRequest 2.6.0Re: "Syntax of elogd.cfg" - Document

Edmundo T Rodriguez wrote:
The document "ELOG - Syntax of elogd.cfg" is outdated!


I forgot to update the web server, but the document distributed in the 2.6.0 package was up to date.


Edmundo T Rodriguez wrote:
Are we going to have an updated documented?


I copied the actual version to the web server.


Edmundo T Rodriguez wrote:
How much difference exists between the one posted as a reference
and new one covering all new options in ELOG?


For the changes from one version to the other, have a look at the changelog.
ELOG V3.1.5-3fb85fa6