ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
68583
|
Mon Mar 20 22:44:27 2017 |
| Andrew Daviel | advax@triumf.ca | Question | Linux | 2.7.5 | Re: Issue with zero-length mail attachments |
Andrew Daviel wrote: |
We have elog-2.7.5-1.i386 on SL 5
If I create an elog entry using the web interface, and include an inline image, email is sent with a zero-length named attachment - the MIME header is present, but no content.
In the config file, Email Format = 47, though I also tried with format = 63.
Is this a bug that was fixed in a later version, or a configuration error (or a new bug) ?
|
Probably us not having ImageMagick installed. elog was able to attach pdf's, xpm's and xbm's to email, but not jpeg's or png's, though they inlined OK in HTML on the server.
It seems OK, I think, after installing ImageMagick and restarting. |
65669
|
Fri Nov 30 08:57:54 2007 |
| Adam Blandford | adamhblandford@hotmail.com | Question | Windows | 2.7.0-1964 | Display Picture in ELOG Welcome Page |
Hi
I want to display an image on the title page and have put the following code into the elogd.cfg:
Welcome Title = <img src="pictures/ln2.jpg"><p><font size = 5 color=white>Welcome to My Project Log</font>
I have put the picture "ln2.jpg" in a pictures folder I have created in the root ELOG directory however the image does not show up. Any assistance would be great :)
Thanks in advance
Adam
|
65674
|
Wed Dec 5 13:10:52 2007 |
| Adam Blandford | adamhblandford@hotmail.com | Request | Windows | 2.7.0-1964 | Print Function | While it is possible to print a logbook using the standard web browser print command in the Full or Summary view, a dedicated print function allowing the user to print out a hardcopy of a particular logbook would be very helpful.
Cheers
Adam
P.S. Thankyou for the response in elog:65671 |
66660
|
Wed Jan 6 22:17:49 2010 |
| Aaron Couture | acouture@lanl.gov | Bug report | Linux | rev2280 | Problem with CRYPT+SSL and elog command line entries | I am in the process of setting up a new ELOG logbook. I checked out rev2280 from svn.savannah.psi.ch. I knew I wanted to encrypt passwords, so when I compiled, I used flags
USE_SSL=1
and
USE_CRYPT=1
I am running Red Hat enterprise linux 3, glibc-devel-2.3.2-95.50, openssl-devel-0.9.7a-33.25
Everything seemed to be working fine--I was able to set up logbooks using both a password file as well as write passwords and make entries to the logs. Then I tried to use the command line 'elog' to make an entry which failed to both logbooks.
/opt/elog/pro/elogd -c /opt/elog/pro/dansce_fancy.cfg -l Demo1 -w <mypassword>
Would change the password in dansce_fancy.cfg and I could make entries through the web interface, but
elog -h acouture -s -p 8081 -w <mypassword> -l Demo1 -a Author="Aaron Couture" -a Type=Routine -m Sampleinfo.txt -x -n 1
failed with
Error: Invalid user name or password
I got the same behaviour when I used a logbook with a user/password pair defined in a password file.
When I looked at the output from running elogd with the -v flag, I could see that everything was being received on the server side, but that the password did not agree with the write password in dansce_fancy.cfg
I then recompiled elog with
USE_SSL=1
USE_CRYPT=
And then the elog command line entries worked, both with write passwords and a password file (after recreating the password file and the write password). Looking at the elog.c source code, it appears that it does not know to use crypt rather then base64_encode when USE_CRYPT is true. elogd.c defined different behaviour if USE_CRYPT is defined.
Thanks,
Aaron Couture
|
66661
|
Thu Jan 7 21:22:09 2010 |
| Aaron Couture | acouture@lanl.gov | Bug report | Linux | rev2280 | Re: Problem with CRYPT+SSL and elog command line entries |
I Aaron Couture wrote: |
I have attached a possible patch--basically pirated from elogd.c Because strlcpy needed for the crypt cares about size, do_crypt needed the size, which had not been a concern for base64_encode in elog.c As a result, base64_encode changed slightly as well. I think the implementation places a limit of 32 characters on passwords, which seemed to already be the limit in elogd.c The elog.c limit appeared to be 80 characters. I tested both SSL and SSL+CRYPT for commandline elog entries with both a logbook specific write password as well as username/password combo in a password file.
AJC
I am in the process of setting up a new ELOG logbook. I checked out rev2280 from svn.savannah.psi.ch. I knew I wanted to encrypt passwords, so when I compiled, I used flags
USE_SSL=1
and
USE_CRYPT=1
I am running Red Hat enterprise linux 3, glibc-devel-2.3.2-95.50, openssl-devel-0.9.7a-33.25
Everything seemed to be working fine--I was able to set up logbooks using both a password file as well as write passwords and make entries to the logs. Then I tried to use the command line 'elog' to make an entry which failed to both logbooks.
/opt/elog/pro/elogd -c /opt/elog/pro/dansce_fancy.cfg -l Demo1 -w <mypassword>
Would change the password in dansce_fancy.cfg and I could make entries through the web interface, but
elog -h acouture -s -p 8081 -w <mypassword> -l Demo1 -a Author="Aaron Couture" -a Type=Routine -m Sampleinfo.txt -x -n 1
failed with
Error: Invalid user name or password
I got the same behaviour when I used a logbook with a user/password pair defined in a password file.
When I looked at the output from running elogd with the -v flag, I could see that everything was being received on the server side, but that the password did not agree with the write password in dansce_fancy.cfg
I then recompiled elog with
USE_SSL=1
USE_CRYPT=
And then the elog command line entries worked, both with write passwords and a password file (after recreating the password file and the write password). Looking at the elog.c source code, it appears that it does not know to use crypt rather then base64_encode when USE_CRYPT is true. elogd.c defined different behaviour if USE_CRYPT is defined.
Thanks,
Aaron Couture
|
|
Attachment 1: elogc.patch
|
64c64
< void base64_encode(char *s, char *d)
---
> void base64_encode(unsigned char *s, unsigned char *d, int size)
66a67
> unsigned char *p;
68c69
< pad = 3 - strlen(s) % 3;
---
> pad = 3 - strlen((char *) s) % 3;
70a72
> p = d;
86a89,90
> if (d - p >= size - 3)
> return;
92a97,106
> void do_crypt(char *s, char *d, int size)
> {
> #ifdef HAVE_CRYPT
> strlcpy(d, crypt(s, "el"), size);
> #else
> base64_encode((unsigned char *) s, (unsigned char *) d, size);
> #endif
> }
>
>
382c396
< char str[256], *ph, *ps;
---
> char str[256], encrypted_passwd[32], *ph, *ps;
422,423c436,437
< base64_encode(passwd, str);
< sprintf(request + strlen(request), "wpwd=%s;", str);
---
> do_crypt(passwd, encrypted_passwd, sizeof(encrypted_passwd) );
> sprintf(request + strlen(request), "wpwd=%s;", encrypted_passwd);
439,440c453,454
< base64_encode(upwd, str);
< sprintf(request + strlen(request), "upwd=%s;", str);
---
> do_crypt(upwd, encrypted_passwd, sizeof(encrypted_passwd) );
> sprintf(request + strlen(request), "upwd=%s;", encrypted_passwd);
628c642
< char host_name[256], boundary[80], str[80], *p, *old_encoding;
---
> char host_name[256], boundary[80], str[80], encrypted_passwd[32], *p, *old_encoding;
801c815
< base64_encode(upwd, str);
---
> do_crypt(upwd, encrypted_passwd, sizeof(encrypted_passwd) );
803c817
< "%s\r\nContent-Disposition: form-data; name=\"upwd\"\r\n\r\n%s\r\n", boundary, str);
---
> "%s\r\nContent-Disposition: form-data; name=\"upwd\"\r\n\r\n%s\r\n", boundary, encrypted_passwd);
885,886c899,900
< base64_encode(passwd, str);
< sprintf(request + strlen(request), "Cookie: wpwd=%s\r\n", str);
---
> do_crypt(passwd, encrypted_passwd, sizeof(encrypted_passwd) );
> sprintf(request + strlen(request), "Cookie: wpwd=%s\r\n", encrypted_passwd);
|
66663
|
Fri Jan 8 18:26:56 2010 |
| Aaron Couture | acouture@lanl.gov | Bug report | Linux | rev2280 | Re: Problem with CRYPT+SSL and elog command line entries |
Aaron Couture wrote: |
I Aaron Couture wrote: |
There was some sloppiness in the original patch--__USE_XOPEN wasn't defined, but worked when elog wasn't compiled alone. Now the appropriate ifndef/define statements are in elog.c
I have attached a possible patch--basically pirated from elogd.c Because strlcpy needed for the crypt cares about size, do_crypt needed the size, which had not been a concern for base64_encode in elog.c As a result, base64_encode changed slightly as well. I think the implementation places a limit of 32 characters on passwords, which seemed to already be the limit in elogd.c The elog.c limit appeared to be 80 characters. I tested both SSL and SSL+CRYPT for commandline elog entries with both a logbook specific write password as well as username/password combo in a password file.
AJC
I am in the process of setting up a new ELOG logbook. I checked out rev2280 from svn.savannah.psi.ch. I knew I wanted to encrypt passwords, so when I compiled, I used flags
USE_SSL=1
and
USE_CRYPT=1
I am running Red Hat enterprise linux 3, glibc-devel-2.3.2-95.50, openssl-devel-0.9.7a-33.25
Everything seemed to be working fine--I was able to set up logbooks using both a password file as well as write passwords and make entries to the logs. Then I tried to use the command line 'elog' to make an entry which failed to both logbooks.
/opt/elog/pro/elogd -c /opt/elog/pro/dansce_fancy.cfg -l Demo1 -w <mypassword>
Would change the password in dansce_fancy.cfg and I could make entries through the web interface, but
elog -h acouture -s -p 8081 -w <mypassword> -l Demo1 -a Author="Aaron Couture" -a Type=Routine -m Sampleinfo.txt -x -n 1
failed with
Error: Invalid user name or password
I got the same behaviour when I used a logbook with a user/password pair defined in a password file.
When I looked at the output from running elogd with the -v flag, I could see that everything was being received on the server side, but that the password did not agree with the write password in dansce_fancy.cfg
I then recompiled elog with
USE_SSL=1
USE_CRYPT=
And then the elog command line entries worked, both with write passwords and a password file (after recreating the password file and the write password). Looking at the elog.c source code, it appears that it does not know to use crypt rather then base64_encode when USE_CRYPT is true. elogd.c defined different behaviour if USE_CRYPT is defined.
Thanks,
Aaron Couture
|
|
|
Attachment 1: elogc.patch
|
26a27,30
> #ifndef __USE_XOPEN
> #define __USE_XOPEN /* needed for crypt() */
> #endif
>
64c68
< void base64_encode(char *s, char *d)
---
> void base64_encode(unsigned char *s, unsigned char *d, int size)
66a71
> unsigned char *p;
68c73
< pad = 3 - strlen(s) % 3;
---
> pad = 3 - strlen((char *) s) % 3;
70a76
> p = d;
86a93,94
> if (d - p >= size - 3)
> return;
92a101
>
182a192,201
>
> void do_crypt(char *s, char *d, int size)
> {
> #ifdef HAVE_CRYPT
> strlcpy(d, crypt(s, "el"), size);
> #else
> base64_encode((unsigned char *) s, (unsigned char *) d, size);
> #endif
> }
>
382c401
< char str[256], *ph, *ps;
---
> char str[256], encrypted_passwd[32], *ph, *ps;
422,423c441,442
< base64_encode(passwd, str);
< sprintf(request + strlen(request), "wpwd=%s;", str);
---
> do_crypt(passwd, encrypted_passwd, sizeof(encrypted_passwd) );
> sprintf(request + strlen(request), "wpwd=%s;", encrypted_passwd);
439,440c458,459
< base64_encode(upwd, str);
< sprintf(request + strlen(request), "upwd=%s;", str);
---
> do_crypt(upwd, encrypted_passwd, sizeof(encrypted_passwd) );
> sprintf(request + strlen(request), "upwd=%s;", encrypted_passwd);
628c647
< char host_name[256], boundary[80], str[80], *p, *old_encoding;
---
> char host_name[256], boundary[80], str[80], encrypted_passwd[32], *p, *old_encoding;
801c820
< base64_encode(upwd, str);
---
> do_crypt(upwd, encrypted_passwd, sizeof(encrypted_passwd) );
803c822
< "%s\r\nContent-Disposition: form-data; name=\"upwd\"\r\n\r\n%s\r\n", boundary, str);
---
> "%s\r\nContent-Disposition: form-data; name=\"upwd\"\r\n\r\n%s\r\n", boundary, encrypted_passwd);
885,886c904,905
< base64_encode(passwd, str);
< sprintf(request + strlen(request), "Cookie: wpwd=%s\r\n", str);
---
> do_crypt(passwd, encrypted_passwd, sizeof(encrypted_passwd) );
> sprintf(request + strlen(request), "Cookie: wpwd=%s\r\n", encrypted_passwd);
|
67836
|
Tue Mar 24 19:08:34 2015 |
| Pedro Acosta | acostacespedes@gmail.com this | Bug report | Windows | 3.0.0 | Re: Trouble to install ELOG V3.0.0-72a8401 in XP SP3 | Maybe, nobody uses XP SP3 but i get Win32 invalid aplication error. Not work!
Pedro Acosta wrote: |
Hi,
It´s not possible to install the last version V3.0.0-72a8401 over XP SP3, the previous version works well. For Windows Vista Home Basic SP2 work fine the last version.
I´m not sure if this the correct site to post this.
Regards
Pedro Acosta
|
|
67834
|
Mon Mar 23 17:02:03 2015 |
| Pedro Acosta | acostacespedes@gmail.com | Bug report | Windows | 3.0.0 | Trouble to install ELOG V3.0.0-72a8401 in XP SP3 | Hi,
It´s not possible to install the last version V3.0.0-72a8401 over XP SP3, the previous version works well. For Windows Vista Home Basic SP2 work fine the last version.
I´m not sure if this the correct site to post this.
Regards
Pedro Acosta
|
|