Re: What *exactly* do "clone" and "mirror" do?, posted by Stefan Ritt on Wed Jul 28 16:55:32 2010
|
| David McKee wrote: |
|
We have been hosting logbook far (geographically and in internet hops) from our experimental site. Recently we have (finally!) gotten reliable on-site internet, and would like to host the log book on-site.
I have a suspicion that some combination of the -C, -m, and -M flags will allow me to migrate the logbook automagically and with a minimum risk of trouble from concurrent operation on the logbook, and to maintain the existing version as a mirror of the new official on-site version. But documentation is not being very helpful. Can someone say a few more words about what these options do?
I've been experimenting as I compose this and have a suggestion for language that might be useful somewhere in the documentation:
In this context "to clone" means to copy the configuration file and all data files associated with a log book so that I can host an identical logbook on a new host (that is this is the command to migrate a logbook). After cloning the two installation are identical, but no effort is made to keep them so: if you continue to run both copies post made to one will not be reflected in the other.
Is this correct?
I'm still not clear on what the -m and -M options do.
|
Yes this is correct. But actually you do not necessarily need that. If you want to migrate a logbook to another server, you can just copy over the elog directory containing the configuration file and the logbooks. That's it. Mirroring now means manually triggered or periodic synchronization between two servers to keep the logbooks in sync. Like if an entry is entered on one server, it gets copied over to the other server automatically. That works in both directions. The periodic mirroring can be done using the options "Mirror server" and "Mirror cron" in the configuration files. It can be manually triggered using the "-m" and "-M" flags. But I guess in your case it's enough to copy over the elog tree just once. |
|
Re: alphabetize Quick Filter items?, posted by Dennis Seitz on Wed Jul 28 17:01:06 2010
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
| Dennis Seitz wrote: |
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
| Dennis Seitz wrote: |
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
| Dennis Seitz wrote: |
|
Hi Stefan,
I'd like to request a feature: automatic alphabetization of the items in the Quick Filter menus.
We track quite a few detector assemblies, which are produced with non-sequential designations. It would be useful if the Quick Filter list was automatically sorted alphabetically to make it more convenient for folks to find a particular item.
I know people can always search by designation but it would be handy to have this alpha sorting feature. Would it be possible to include that in a future release?
Thanks again for a *very* useful logging system!
Dennis
|
The order of items in a Quick Filter menu is exactly as in the configuration file. Like if you have items
Options Type = C, D, A, B
they are shown like that in the quick filter menu. If you want to sort them, just do the sorting yourself in the configuration file like
Options Type = A, B, C, D
I have not implemented automatic sorting since some people want a different order, like some main topics at top. So by following the order from the configuration file, everybody can be satisfied just by chaning the order in the config file.
- Stefan
|
Yes, I have been manually sorting and resorting. We have extendable attributes and the list keeps growing so I have to resort every so often. I thought perhaps a simple alphanumeric sort as an option would be popular with most users so I thought I'd ask for it. It would really simplify things for me. Users who want to sort manually could do so by disabling the option. It never hurts to ask!
|
Ok, I implemented
Sort attribute options = 1
in the current SVN revision.
|
I've tried adding this statement to my cfg file but the attributes are still unsorted in the QuickFilter menus. Was this implemented in 2.7.7?
Shouldn't an existing configuration file entry like
Options Type = C, D, A, B
be sorted in the QuickFilter menu as A B C D?
|
You need revision 2252 or later. So you have to upgrade to 2.7.8.
|
We have upgraded to 2.7.8 but this still doesn't seem to work. The quick menus are still unsorted. Does it work for you? |
|
Re: alphabetize Quick Filter items?, posted by Stefan Ritt on Wed Jul 28 17:15:33 2010
|
| Dennis Seitz wrote: |
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
| Dennis Seitz wrote: |
|
| |
|
Ok, I implemented
Sort attribute options = 1
in the current SVN revision.
|
I've tried adding this statement to my cfg file but the attributes are still unsorted in the QuickFilter menus. Was this implemented in 2.7.7?
Shouldn't an existing configuration file entry like
Options Type = C, D, A, B
be sorted in the QuickFilter menu as A B C D?
|
You need revision 2252 or later. So you have to upgrade to 2.7.8.
|
We have upgraded to 2.7.8 but this still doesn't seem to work. The quick menus are still unsorted. Does it work for you?
|
Sorry, there was a typo, you need
Sort attribute options <attribute> = 1
where <attribute> is the name of the attribute to be sorted (in case you want some attributes sorted, but not all). |
|
Re: alphabetize Quick Filter items?, posted by Dennis Seitz on Wed Jul 28 22:03:26 2010
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
| Dennis Seitz wrote: |
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
| Dennis Seitz wrote: |
|
| |
|
Ok, I implemented
Sort attribute options = 1
in the current SVN revision.
|
I've tried adding this statement to my cfg file but the attributes are still unsorted in the QuickFilter menus. Was this implemented in 2.7.7?
Shouldn't an existing configuration file entry like
Options Type = C, D, A, B
be sorted in the QuickFilter menu as A B C D?
|
You need revision 2252 or later. So you have to upgrade to 2.7.8.
|
We have upgraded to 2.7.8 but this still doesn't seem to work. The quick menus are still unsorted. Does it work for you?
|
Sorry, there was a typo, you need
Sort attribute options <attribute> = 1
where <attribute> is the name of the attribute to be sorted (in case you want some attributes sorted, but not all).
|
That did the trick. That was a good idea, to give us the option of which attributes to sort, too. Thanks again for adding this feature! |
Important security update of ELOG, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Aug 2 13:40:02 2010
|
Dear ELOG users,
this is to announce an important security update. As proposed by Lukasz Olejnik (CERN/PSNC), ELOG has now switched to strong encryption of password. So everybody concerned in security is advised to update to the new version 2.8.0. Existing password files for Windows users and Linux users not using HAVE_CRYPT are automatically converted. Those installations which used HAVE_CRYPT in the past under Linux have to ask their users to re-enter their password (via the link "Forgot password") after the upgrade to version 2.8.0.
Best regards,
Stefan Ritt |
|
Re: Important security update of ELOG, posted by Stefan Ritt on Thu Aug 5 12:26:12 2010
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
Dear ELOG users,
this is to announce an important security update. As proposed by Lukasz Olejnik (CERN/PSNC), ELOG has now switched to strong encryption of password. So everybody concerned in security is advised to update to the new version 2.8.0. Existing password files for Windows users and Linux users not using HAVE_CRYPT are automatically converted. Those installations which used HAVE_CRYPT in the past under Linux have to ask their users to re-enter their password (via the link "Forgot password") after the upgrade to version 2.8.0.
Best regards,
Stefan Ritt
|
I just realized that the command line elog utility did not yet use the new encryption. So automatic elog submissions using passwords are broken in version 2.8.0. I made an intermediate version 2.8.0-2 which fixes that. However you only need to update it if you use the elog utility and have problems with the 2.8.0 version. |
Elog v2.7.8 does not show substituted attributes while editing or replying, posted by Dennis Seitz on Thu Aug 19 22:58:45 2010
|
Since we updated to 2.7.8 we've found a problem.
Previously, when we used
Subst on reply subject = Re: $subject
The new "Re: " text would appear in the "subject" field while the user was editing their reply, and they could edit or delete it.
Since 2.7.8, however, it does not appear while editing, but shows up only after the user submits their entry. We would prefer that this appears while the user is editing, because in some cases we want the users to have the option to modify this text. Was this intentional? Is there a way to restore the previous functionality?
Thank you! |
|
Re: How to make Subst run?, posted by Andreas Luedeke on Fri Sep 3 14:14:07 2010
|
| Robert Heine wrote: | Dear colleagues,
I tried to get an Subst <attrib> = $shell(<command>) to work and put this into a Preset text line, like e.g.:
Attributes = subject, ...
Options <name> = test{1}, ...
Subst myvar = $shell(dir)
{1} Preset subject = Test
{1} Preset text = $myvar
Which results in an ELOG-entry having printed "$myvar" in its body instead of the expected substitution. Changing the Subst command to: "Subst myvar = $host" or even to "Subst myvar = Test" also resulted in printing just the string "$myvar" into the submitted Elog-entry. - What am I doing wrong? |
What you want to do is done simply by:{1} Preset text = $shell(dir)You expect "Subst" to create new variables, but it cannot do this.
"Subst" can overwrite the value of an existing field in an already submitted entry, while
"Preset" allows to prefill an existing entry field and the user may overwrites it before submitting (if it is not "Locked".)
In both cases you can either call a shellscript to create the desired text, or you can use
one of the predefined variables defined in the help pages "ELOG - Syntax of elogd.cfg" for "Subst".
Cheers Andreas |
|