> > It seems to work nice to me.
> > Just another suggestion: I think it would be better to insert a commented out
> > example for all allowed parameters in the distributed  /etc/default/elog
> 
> Thanks for the test.  Please note that, /etc/default/elog is partially auto
> created during the installation.  All options except PIDFILE and CONFFILE are
> currently listed (as configured or commented out).  If you didn't see these
> options (after the update), there must be a problem.   Did you mean the lack of
> PIDFILE and CONFFILE in the default file?

no, my bad (it seems :-P) .. I re-installed the package now on my laptop and seems
to work fine... maybe I have swapped the diff result when installed yesterday.

Making tests I found another problem, her is the report:

####
root@emc2:/home/albert# apt-get remove elog
Lettura della lista dei pacchetti in corso... Fatto
Generazione dell'albero delle dipendenze in corso... Fatto
I seguenti pacchetti saranno RIMOSSI:
  elog
0 aggiornati, 0 installati, 1 da rimuovere e 0 non aggiornati.
È necessario prendere 0B di archivi.
Dopo l'estrazione, verranno liberati 2444kB di spazio su disco.
Continuare? [S/n]
(Lettura del database ... 152033 file e directory attualmente installati.)
Rimuovo elog ...
Stopping ELOG daemon: elogd.
root@emc2:/home/albert# rm /etc/default/elog
rm: rimuovere regular file `/etc/default/elog'? y
root@emc2:/home/albert# apt-get install elog
Lettura della lista dei pacchetti in corso... Fatto
Generazione dell'albero delle dipendenze in corso... Fatto
I seguenti pacchetti NUOVI (NEW) saranno installati:
  elog
0 aggiornati, 1 installati, 0 da rimuovere e 0 non aggiornati.
È necessario prendere 0B/530kB di archivi.
Dopo l'estrazione, verranno occupati 2444kB di spazio su disco.
Selezionato il pacchetto elog, che non lo era.
(Lettura del database ... 151926 file e directory attualmente installati.)
Spacchetto elog (da .../elog_2.5.8+r1592-1_i386.deb) ...
Configuro elog (2.5.8+r1592-1) ...
cat: /etc/default/elog: No such file or directory
Starting ELOG daemon: elogd.
####


So, removing an existing elog (not purging) and installing again raise the error.
Why installation creates the default/elog file only the first time ?  I think it
shoud do the job everytime (and everytime ask the user is there is a diff to be
checked)

> Hi to all,
> 
> I've prepared a new Debian package.  This version will probably be the one
> which you'll find in Sarge/stable.
> 
> There are some invasive changes in this version which call for a serious
> test.  In accordance with a suggestion, I've changed the configuration
> mechanism.  For details, please read the NEWS.Debian file attached.
> 
> Could the Debian users who follow this forum test it and give some feedback?
> You can download the package from the following link:
> 
>   http://l10n-turkish.alioth.debian.org/debian/elog_2.5.8+r1592-1_i386.deb
> 
> Thanks in advance for your participation,

btw, what about in including in default/elog also a voice for the "-x" switch ??

It is a security related thing and may be passed only on the command line to the
daemon, so it should be governed by the system elog admin.

I would like to create a paper waste logbook. I need to have a column that 
shows a weight in pounds and another column with a calculation from those 
pounds to dollars.  pounds x $4.00 = cost  I was wondering if this was 
possible? 

All other fields would be just Date, Batch#, Operator, Reason, Process 
Operator, Manager, Lbs, and Cost,  I would also like to total this cost if 
possible, on a search selected basis. Similar to Excel.

Thanks for any input

David Egolf

> I would like to create a paper waste logbook. I need to have a column that 
> shows a weight in pounds and another column with a calculation from those 
> pounds to dollars.  pounds x $4.00 = cost  I was wondering if this was 
> possible? 
> 
> All other fields would be just Date, Batch#, Operator, Reason, Process 
> Operator, Manager, Lbs, and Cost,  I would also like to total this cost if 
> possible, on a search selected basis. Similar to Excel.

Unfortunately not. But your request is on the wishlist since some time, I added
your vote.

> > > Logins work OK if the username/password is valid.  However, if I try to login
> > > with invalid authentication, the server crashes.  If I turn off the protect
> > > selection page, then invalid authentication does not crash elogd.
> > 
> > Ok, it's me, Speedy Gonzales again (as Emiliano says... (;-))
> > 
> > I fixed that as well and committed the changes.
> 
> That seems to do the trick!  Thanks, Steve

Hi,
where can I find this correction for ELOG?
thanks a lot :o)

> > > > Logins work OK if the username/password is valid.  However, if I try to login
> > > > with invalid authentication, the server crashes.  If I turn off the protect
> > > > selection page, then invalid authentication does not crash elogd.
> > > 
> > > Ok, it's me, Speedy Gonzales again (as Emiliano says... (;-))
> > > 
> > > I fixed that as well and committed the changes.
> > 
> > That seems to do the trick!  Thanks, Steve
> 
> Hi,
> where can I find this correction for ELOG?
> thanks a lot :o)

It's under CVS. You have to recompile the executable yourself, or you wait for the next
release (;-)

When I upload a HTML-File as attachement the file is shown as the
HTML-source and not as the formatted text. Is there a possibility to see the
HTML-attachements as formatted text like images are shown as images?

> When I upload a HTML-File as attachement the file is shown as the
> HTML-source and not as the formatted text. Is there a possibility to see the
> HTML-attachements as formatted text like images are shown as images?

I could turn the ASCII display off, but the result is not always what you want.
If you have a HTML file without the <html>, <header> and <body> tags, it's ok.
But if you have these tags in your HTML (and this is the normal case), the
resulting page has these tags twice, once from the ELOG page and once from the
attachment. This confuses some browsers, so the resulting page might look
strange. A solution would be to strip these tags from the attachment, but for
that I would have to interprete the HTML attachment completely, which is too
much work.

So I will turn the ASCII display off in the next release, but be prepared to see
some nonexpected results.