ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
1221
|
Sun Jul 3 03:48:12 2005 |
| John Habermann | john.habermann@wilderness.org.au | Question | Linux | 2.5.9+r167 | changing the default to plain text rather than elcode | Hi
I just shifted our elogs to a new server and in the process upgraded to the latest debian version which is 2.5.9+r1674-1. I am just wondering how to change the default for the text body area from "elcode" to plain text? I can't see anything in the admin configuration syntax guide and the HTML default = 2 option no longer seems to work.
Also is there anything in particular that you have to do to get the elcode editor to work. Although the elcode buttons appear highlighting text and clicking on them doesn't actually do anything although it works fine in my browser when using these elog forums. I don't get any errors in mozilla but trying it in IE under cxoffice gives an "error on page" message in the bottom of the browser.
Thanks
John |
1220
|
Mon Jun 27 15:37:25 2005 |
| Emiliano Gabrielli | AlberT@SuperAlberT.it | Bug fix | Linux | 2.6.0beta2 | Re: [BUG] quick filter |
Emiliano Gabrielli wrote: |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Fixed in current CVS.
|
uhm... now the drop down menu is composed of only blancs ..
|
the following patch should solve the problem 
--- src/elogd.c 24 Jun 2005 20:22:33 -0000 1.685
+++ src/elogd.c 27 Jun 2005 13:34:05 -0000
@@ -15853,7 +15853,7 @@
if (comment[0] == 0)
strcpy(comment, attr_options[i][j]);
- for (i1=i2=0 ; i1<=(int)comment ; i1++) {
+ for (i1=i2=0 ; i1<=(int)strlen(comment) ; i1++) {
if (comment[i1] == '(') {
option[i2++] = '\\';
option[i2++] = '(';
|
1219
|
Mon Jun 27 15:19:05 2005 |
| Emiliano Gabrielli | AlberT@SuperAlberT.it | | Linux | 2.6.0beta2 | Re: [BUG] quick filter |
Emiliano Gabrielli wrote: |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Emiliano Gabrielli wrote: | it seems that the select box of quick filters are showing also the "{n}" appended to the Attributes in order to obtain conditional Attributes ...
see the snapshot attached |
Fixed in current CVS.
BTW, I would display the date selection calender in a new floating window, not to take away all the precious screen space at the top. Then I would use the same calendar as for the date attributes, not to confuse users with two different styles. |
uhm... now the drop down menu is composed of only blancs ..
Reguarding the calendar... the picture is just one of my tests .. I started using a popup window, but it makes complicated to do all the job I want.. so my current idea is to implemnet it a a dropdown layer, it will save both the precious space and the functionality..
I don't use the existing style becouse of, in the first popup try, it was to simple .. now I can't use it directly becouse I don't need any popup anymore.. but ok, we can keep the same style of course  |
|
1218
|
Mon Jun 27 15:16:37 2005 |
| Emiliano Gabrielli | AlberT@SuperAlberT.it | | Linux | 2.6.0beta2 | Re: [BUG] quick filter |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Emiliano Gabrielli wrote: | it seems that the select box of quick filters are showing also the "{n}" appended to the Attributes in order to obtain conditional Attributes ...
see the snapshot attached |
Fixed in current CVS.
BTW, I would display the date selection calender in a new floating window, not to take away all the precious screen space at the top. Then I would use the same calendar as for the date attributes, not to confuse users with two different styles. |
Are you sure you really committed it ? 
Reguarding the calendar... the picture is just one of my tests .. I started using a popup window, but it makes complicated to do all the job I want.. so my current idea is to implemnet it a a dropdown layer, it will save both the precious space and the functionality..
I don't use the existing style becouse of, in the first popup try, it was to simple .. now I can't use it directly becouse I don't need any popup anymore.. but ok, we can keep the same style of course  |
1217
|
Mon Jun 27 15:09:12 2005 |
| Emiliano Gabrielli | AlberT@SuperAlberT.it | Bug report | All | 2.6.0beta2 | Re: [BUG] show only new entries |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Emiliano Gabrielli wrote: | the new link "show only new entries" is very useful but seems to still have some problems:
- I can't find any simple way to return to the "every entries" display .. may be the link has to be switched to a checkbox to be actived or not
- I found a way (at least)... following the "config" link, doing nothing and coming back restores the view .. this is a feature now, but when a less tricky mechanism will be implemented will become a bug

|
I added a "Show all entries" link to go back.
|
I think you only committed the changes to elcode.js but not the ones relative to elogd.c ... the Attribute quick filter is now empty, and no "show all entries" is ever displayed |
1216
|
Fri Jun 24 22:44:03 2005 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Bug report | All | 2.6.0beta2 | Re: [BUG] show only new entries |
Emiliano Gabrielli wrote: | the new link "show only new entries" is very useful but seems to still have some problems:
- I can't find any simple way to return to the "every entries" display .. may be the link has to be switched to a checkbox to be actived or not
- I found a way (at least)... following the "config" link, doing nothing and coming back restores the view .. this is a feature now, but when a less tricky mechanism will be implemented will become a bug

|
I added a "Show all entries" link to go back.
Emiliano Gabrielli wrote: | another entry for my wishlist:
writeing the above code I noticed that the elcode buttons are lacking of a "[ *]" shortcut .. it will be very usefull  |
I added that to elcode.js . So if you click on the list button, the (LIST) tag and the the first (*) are inserted.
Emiliano Gabrielli wrote: | Writeing the wish above I noticed that the [ *] is interpreted as an item also otside the LIST tag .. so .. or the LIST tag is optional, or the [ *] should not be interpreted outside of it ... it's another bug ? P |
Well, the ELCode stuff if a poor man's version of HTML. So each [ LIST] gets converted into a <UL> tag, and each [ *] gets converted into a <LI> tag. This makes the interpretation very simple, but the code does have no clue if your are inside a [ LIST] or not. Common bulletin boards have exactly the same problem. To fix it, you would really have to interprete all the ELCode, and I don't want to write my own parser. |
1215
|
Fri Jun 24 22:23:50 2005 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | | Linux | 2.6.0beta2 | Re: [BUG] quick filter |
Emiliano Gabrielli wrote: | it seems that the select box of quick filters are showing also the "{n}" appended to the Attributes in order to obtain conditional Attributes ...
see the snapshot attached |
Fixed in current CVS.
BTW, I would display the date selection calender in a new floating window, not to take away all the precious screen space at the top. Then I would use the same calendar as for the date attributes, not to confuse users with two different styles. |
1214
|
Fri Jun 24 21:24:55 2005 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Linux | 2.6.0 | Re: Cloning |
Gerfried Kumbartzki wrote: | But this is only part of the story. The logbook on the labtop is owned by the
default user elog and default group elog, that is needed to start up the elogd. Only a user "elog" can do the cloning, unless temporarily the owner ship in /usr/local/elog is changed. I made it work by temporarily changing the owner ship on both machines, did the cloning, changed back to owner elog, started elogd and all was running. |
The /usr/local/elog files should be owned by user elog on both machines, and both elogd daemons should be started under user elog. Since only the two elogd daemons communicate with each other during synchronization, that should be fine. Only after the initial cloning (which you presumably do under your own user account), you have to do a "chmod" to change ownership of all files to uid/gid "elog/elog".
Gerfried Kumbartzki wrote: | I setup synchronizing and here too it works only if the read passwd in elogd.cfg is commented out. |
As I said, the read password is not really supported for synchronization. It is there historically, from the times when there was no user level password access. If you use synchronization, you should use that authentication (by putting a "password file = ..." into your config.
Gerfried Kumbartzki wrote: | Here I have another question: My Elog is passwd protected, encrypted passwd in elogd.cfg (read and write). When connecting to the elog the window pops up asking for a user name and the passwd. I donot remember exactly, what was done to set name and passwd. But I find it "strange" that the user name can be anything as long as the passwd is right to access the ELog. I think I have to learn more about the whole user and passwd protection schema. |
If you switch to user level password access, this problem goes away as well.
- Stefan |
|