| ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
|
1591
|
Fri Jan 13 02:37:10 2006 |
 | Chris Warner | christopher_warner@dcd.uscourts.gov | Comment | Linux | | Re: LDAP |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Carl Shirey wrote: | I know you want to make ELOG a stand alone program. But is there a way to still make a stand alone but have the option work with LDAP?
FYI
Elog works great we us it for our shift carryover and we have about 25 people useing it and I have heard no complants with it.
Thanks |
I added your vote to the "PAM" authentication on the wishlist, since PAM contains an LDAP module. |
Please Add my vote too. I think that would be great. |
|
1596
|
Tue Jan 17 13:59:58 2006 |
| Chris Warner | christopher_warner@dcd.uscourts.gov | Question | Linux | | Re: Problem selecting ports |
Nevermind. this was an iptables issue.
| Chris Warner wrote: | I had problems getting elog to run on port 8080 (or many others). I have it installed on Redhat Enterprise Linux rel 4. The only way I was able to get it working was using port 80. I would like to run it on a different port if possible but I'm not sure what is wrong.
Any Ideas |
|
|
1623
|
Tue Jan 24 14:39:21 2006 |
| Bertram Metz | bmetz@sbs.com | Bug report | Linux | V2.6.0-bet | Re: Attachments in duplicated entries |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Bertram Metz wrote: | The duplicate command duplicates the entry text itself, but it does not duplicate attachments. If attachments in a duplicated entry are deleted, the original attachment files are deleted as well and cannot be accessed anymore within the original entry.
My suggestion is to copy the attached files too and to use file names of the copies in the duplicated entry. |
I chaned it such that attachments are removed from the duplicated entry, which was easier to implement. I hope this is ok as well. The change is in SVN revision 1584. |
Yes, that's ok for me.
Thank you very much Stefan.
Best Regards,
Bertram |
|
1705
|
Tue Feb 21 21:58:16 2006 |
| Steve Jones | steve.jones@freescale.com | Question | All | 2.6.1 | Re: svn revision number in the source |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Steve Jones wrote: | | So, when we go to the download section and download directly from there, that is not "committed" source? I ask because the revision id there is not set to anything that I can see. |
Can you be a bit more specific? What do you download? The Windows binaries, the Linux RPM? Or from the Subversion repository? The current version in the repository, which you can download here, contains in the file elogd.c following line 8:
$Id: elogd.c 1660 2006-02-17 19:48:12Z ritt $
This tells you that this is revision 1660, committed on Feb. 17 by myself. So what is the problem? |
| Steve Jones wrote: | Ok, this is really strange but just an hour ago I clicked on the http://midas.psi.ch/elog/download.html link and I was taken to a completely different webview - in fact, I am quite sure that at the bottom right corner it said "WebCVS"! Now, it says WebSVN and the revision info is in there. I've been trying to debug a problem with default.css and the elcode icons - and somewhere in there I cleared my firefox cache. Perhaps an old page was cached????
I have no idea how I got to CVS, and it make sense that CVS was not setting the SVN revision code.
Sorry to botter you on this. |
|
|
1712
|
Wed Feb 22 15:47:45 2006 |
| Holger Mundhahs | holger.mundhahs@vtg-rail.com | Question | Windows | 2.6.1-1653 | Re: List view for CHANGE attributes |
Hello Mr. Ritt,
6 min 5 sek to answer - great. 
Thanks & regards
Holger
| Stefan Ritt wrote: | > Hello @all,
> I've tried to implement an attribute with Change. The detail view works well,
> but in the list view the field is empty (see screen shots). Can somebody help me?
For the list view, you need an additional
List Change RIB-Admin = ...
Some people want different modes for the list view and the detail view, that's why there are two options. |
|
|
1724
|
Thu Feb 23 16:36:42 2006 |
| Hagelstein, Kay | k.hagelstein@stadt.wede.de | Question | Windows | 2.6.1 | Re: Protect Selection page |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Hagelstein, Kay wrote: | | I have a problem with the Option “Protect Selection page = 1” it doesn’t word in my Configuration. Is This a bug or a Problem with the Configuration? |
Thanks for reporting this. I could reproduce the prolem thanks to the config file you supplied. I fixed the problem and made a new release 2.6.1-3. |
It works now fine.
Thanks & Regards
Kay |
|
1740
|
Wed Mar 1 20:22:28 2006 |
| Steve Jones | steve.jones@freescale.com | Question | All | 2.5.9 | Re: eLog Version number as eLog attribute? |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Steve Jones wrote: | When a footer is used (via Bottom text = <filename>) eLog no longer displays the eLog version number at the bottom. Is it possible to somehow expose the version/revision as an eLog attribute or have the version still display even when a replacement footer is specified?
Thanks! |
I added that feature, but will not be able to commit it before the next weekend. |
| Quote: | | Not a problem! Thanks |
|
|
1787
|
Mon Apr 3 16:39:33 2006 |
| Steve Jones | steve.jones@freescale.com | Question | All | 2.6 | Re: Numerous questions that I am hoping to get a response on |
| Steve Jones wrote: |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Steve Jones wrote: | | Stefan, I have several issues/questions that I am still hoping to get an answer on. Any chance? If you would rather you can send email to me directly. |
I'm pretty busy these days, since we have a deadline on April 18th. I started already working weekends, so not much time is left for ELOG. But I hope it will get better by the end of this month. |
I fully understand and appreciate your response! |
|