Ok, I will include this patch in the distribution.

Stefan

Bug FIXED! Many thanks Stefan and my warmest congratulations for the elog project.

Stefano

Hi Stefan,

It seems buildrpm should be updated to take care of cpp files. Plz replace "cp <blahblah>.c ..." by "cp <blahblah>.cxx ..." .

Also, uncomment the hostname test witch activates all authentification options by default. It should be done by adding options as follow : buildrpm ver rel -ldap -ker ...

By default, i can not build elog with LDAP.

After that mods, rpms are builded under EL7 (w/o LDAP support which is not useful for me).

Bye

Laurent

FYI.

Removing "wrap=hard" on the line #11461 in the elogd.cxx file resolves my problem.

- rsprintf("<textarea rows=%d cols=%d wrap=hard name=\"Text\">\n", height, width);*/
+ rsprintf("<textarea rows=%d cols=%d name=\"Text\">\n", height, width);

- rsprintf("<textarea rows=%d cols=%d wrap=hard name=\"Text\">\n", height, width);
+ rsprintf("<textarea rows=%d cols=%d name=\"Text\">\n", height, width);

my vote is to remove "wrap=hard":

1) I try to read the specs and my head explodes: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/textarea
2) textarea should just accept input typed by user, should not try to "neatify" it. if user wants long lines, we should let them.
3) this bug (introduced in recent safari, the best I can tell)

K.O.

> - rsprintf("<textarea rows=%d cols=%d wrap=hard name=\"Text\">\n", height, width);
> + rsprintf("<textarea rows=%d cols=%d name=\"Text\">\n", height, width);
> 
> my vote is to remove "wrap=hard":
> 
> 1) I try to read the specs and my head explodes: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/textarea
> 2) textarea should just accept input typed by user, should not try to "neatify" it. if user wants long lines, we should let them.
> 3) this bug (introduced in recent safari, the best I can tell)
> 
> K.O.

I agree with K.O. Does anybody see a problem in removing "wrap=hard"? 

It was there more for historical reasons. In the old days screens were not so wide and wrapping was more of an issue.
People tended to write longer lines and complained that the long lines got reformatted differently for different screen
sizes. So by adding hard CRLF the formatting looked the same on different screens. These days this is not such an issue
any more and I agree with 2) above. If the user wants a long line, the user should get it.

Stefan

Ahh, now I remember. Well, the I put that in like 25 years ago ;-)

Let's assume the user write a very long line and relies on the wrapping of the text box. So the input might look like the 
first attachment. Then the user hits submit and gets just one long line (second attachment) and has to scroll one kilometre
to the right to see the full line. So there is an inconsistency between the entry form and what the user sees after the
submission. Having "wrap=hard" tells the browser to put CRLF where the wrapping in the textarea happens, so the text looks
the same during entry and after submission. If we remove the "wrap=hard", we would be back to the situation below in the two
attachments.

Opinions?

Stefan

oh! so, that's the cause of another problem I faced a while ago. 
When people edited an ELOG page on a narrow screen device (a.k.a smartphone) it put the extra CRLF and made the page look like the attachment below 
(it broke the original formatting).

I had to "fix" this by setting the width of the textarea to a huge number... 

However, removing "wrap=hard" solves both these problems! ;)