Demo Discussion
Forum Config Examples Contributions Vulnerabilities
  Discussion forum about ELOG, Page 721 of 795  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Icon Author Author Emailup Category OS ELOG Version Subject
  1142   Mon May 9 21:08:56 2005 Agree Steve Jonessteve.jones@freescale.comQuestionLinux | Other2.5.9Re: Version of GCC to use?
> > > I ask because I get a dependency that I did not have before with 2.5.3. 
> > > Compiling with my same 'ole gcc 2.95.2 I see that I now need mxml.h and
> > > strlcpy.h.  Trying to compile under gcc 3.4 results in all kinds of errors.
> > 
> > mxml.h and strlcpy.h are part of the elog tar ball. When untar'ed, they get copied
> > into a separate directory:
> > 
> > ...
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke      15090 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.japanese
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke      17587 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.spanish
> > drwxr-xr-x ritt/lke          0 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke      45577 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.c
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke       2198 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.c
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke       4359 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.h
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke        567 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.h
> > 
> > I have right now no access to 3.4. Once I get it, I will address the errors
> > occuring there.
> 
> Ah, now I need to figure out how to pickup the new includes.  
> BTW, personally I wouldn't take my word regarding the 3.4 errors -- I was simply
> trying an alternative version and it is likely that the way ours is configured is the
> problem.
> 
> Thanks!


Ok, now I see the issue - the tar extract created the mxml directory in the root (not
under the created directory elog-2.5.9).  Is there a reason why these includes are not
placed in the src dir like the regex.h/.c include?
  1143   Mon May 9 21:14:53 2005 Question Steve Jonessteve.jones@freescale.comQuestionLinux | Other2.5.9Re: Version of GCC to use?
> > > > I ask because I get a dependency that I did not have before with 2.5.3. 
> > > > Compiling with my same 'ole gcc 2.95.2 I see that I now need mxml.h and
> > > > strlcpy.h.  Trying to compile under gcc 3.4 results in all kinds of errors.
> > > 
> > > mxml.h and strlcpy.h are part of the elog tar ball. When untar'ed, they get copied
> > > into a separate directory:
> > > 
> > > ...
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke      15090 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.japanese
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke      17587 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.spanish
> > > drwxr-xr-x ritt/lke          0 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke      45577 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.c
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke       2198 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.c
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke       4359 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.h
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke        567 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.h
> > > 
> > > I have right now no access to 3.4. Once I get it, I will address the errors
> > > occuring there.
> > 
> > Ah, now I need to figure out how to pickup the new includes.  
> > BTW, personally I wouldn't take my word regarding the 3.4 errors -- I was simply
> > trying an alternative version and it is likely that the way ours is configured is the
> > problem.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> 
> 
> Ok, now I see the issue - the tar extract created the mxml directory in the root (not
> under the created directory elog-2.5.9).  Is there a reason why these includes are not
> placed in the src dir like the regex.h/.c include?


Ack, ok, I moved the includes into src and tried re-compiling -- and received several
"undefined symbol" errors from the linker.  Clearly the libraries cannot be moved into src?
  1146   Mon May 9 23:30:11 2005 Agree Steve Jonessteve.jones@freescale.comQuestionLinux | Other2.5.9Re: Version of GCC to use?
> [ritt@pc5082 /tmp]$ tar -xzvf elog-2.5.9-2.tar.gz
> elog-2.5.9/
> elog-2.5.9/doc/
> elog-2.5.9/doc/adminguide.html
> ...
> mxml/
> mxml/mxml.c
> mxml/strlcpy.c
> mxml/mxml.h
> mxml/strlcpy.h
> [ritt@pc5082 /tmp]$ cd elog-2.5.9
> [ritt@pc5082 elog-2.5.9]$ make
> gcc -O3 -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -W -Wall -o elog src/elog.c
> gcc -O3 -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -W -Wall -c -o regex.o src/regex.c
> ... skipping warnings ...
> gcc -O3 -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -W -Wall -c -o mxml.o ../mxml/mxml.c
> gcc -O3 -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -W -Wall -c -o strlcpy.o ../mxml/strlcpy.c
> gcc -O3 -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -W -Wall -I../mxml -o elogd src/elogd.c regex.o
> mxml.o strlcpy.o
> gcc -O3 -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -W -Wall -o elconv src/elconv.c
> [ritt@pc5082 elog-2.5.9]$
> 
> --------------
> No undefined functions here. I guess you have an old Makefile? Just use the complete tar
> package from the last version.

Ok, now I have it.  Old Makefile because I had to perform some deletions to make "make" work
right under Solaris.  Basically, I took out the ifdef structures - "make" was blowing up on
these.  Everything now compiles perfectly -- don't change anything.  Thanks for that last pointer.

Steve
  1149   Tue May 17 21:38:36 2005 Warning Steve Jonessteve.jones@freescale.comBug reportAll2.5.9Logbook locking issue
Stefan, any ideas on this problem?


Quote:
Our eLog is set to create logbook entry locks and after 30minutes prevent one from re-editing an entry, thus forcing a REPLY to be created.

SCENARIO: When an *attempt* is made to edit a logbook after the 30minute timer, one gets the message that EDITING is prevented and to use the browser "Back" button.

PROBLEM: The display now shows that particular entry to be locked, even though the attempt to edit was blocked. It appears that the lock flag is set prior to the "Edit" attempt being blocked and thus the lock flag is never "unset".
  1165   Wed Jun 1 16:14:22 2005 Warning Steve Jonessteve.jones@freescale.comBug reportAll2.5.9Re: Logbook locking issue

Steve Jones wrote:
Stefan, any ideas on this problem?


Quote:
Our eLog is set to create logbook entry locks and after 30minutes prevent one from re-editing an entry, thus forcing a REPLY to be created.

SCENARIO: When an *attempt* is made to edit a logbook after the 30minute timer, one gets the message that EDITING is prevented and to use the browser "Back" button.

PROBLEM: The display now shows that particular entry to be locked, even though the attempt to edit was blocked. It appears that the lock flag is set prior to the "Edit" attempt being blocked and thus the lock flag is never "unset".


Hmmm, I don't seem to be seeing any responses - is email being generated?
  1167   Wed Jun 1 21:00:01 2005 Cool Steve Jonessteve.jones@freescale.comBug reportAll2.5.9Re: Logbook locking issue

Steve Jones wrote:
Stefan, not a problem. ITMT, any idea how I can manually clear this "lock"? Is it embedded in the logbook itself?


Stefan Ritt wrote:
Sorry about my unusual slow response, but I'm pretty busy these days. I hope I will be able to address this problem in a two weeks from now.


Steve Jones wrote:
Stefan, any ideas on this problem?


Quote:
Our eLog is set to create logbook entry locks and after 30minutes prevent one from re-editing an entry, thus forcing a REPLY to be created.

SCENARIO: When an *attempt* is made to edit a logbook after the 30minute timer, one gets the message that EDITING is prevented and to use the browser "Back" button.

PROBLEM: The display now shows that particular entry to be locked, even though the attempt to edit was blocked. It appears that the lock flag is set prior to the "Edit" attempt being blocked and thus the lock flag is never "unset".
  1655   Mon Feb 6 16:44:46 2006 Reply Steve Jonessteve.jones@freescale.comQuestionOther2.6.1Re: compiling elog 2.6.1 on solaris platform

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Angus Au wrote:
ld: fatal: library -lutil: not found


The util library was added recently because of the new shell substitution functionaly, which requires the forkpty() function call. If you know in which library the forkpty is available on solaris, the makefile could be adjusted accordingly. If the forkpty is not available at all, we have to disable the shell substitution under solaris via conditional compilation.



Steve Jones wrote:
I have checked and can find no reference within Sun documents regarding the support of the forkpty() function. I have not been following elog development lately -- what is shell substitution supposed to buy us?

-- Ah, just looked at the docs, I see what that buys us. Surely there is a similar function available that is cross platform?
  1664   Wed Feb 8 18:19:02 2006 Reply Steve Jonessteve.jones@freescale.comQuestionOther2.6.1Re: compiling elog 2.6.1 on solaris platform

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Steve Jones wrote:
I have checked and can find no reference within Sun documents regarding the support of the forkpty() function. I have not been following elog development lately -- what is shell substitution supposed to buy us?


See the config manual and look for $shell



Steve Jones wrote:
Yep, I saw it. Thanks
ELOG V3.1.5-fe60aaf