• Create a new entry
  
• Create a numbered list:

  [LIST=1]
  [*] 1st entry
  [*] 2nd entry
  [/LIST]
  

• In the resulting HTML code, the closing statement of that list translates to </ul> instead of </ol>, causing the list to remain open and all following text to be intented by the list indentation. This gets worse when several such lists are used in one document. I'll include an example below.
  

1. one
   
2. two
   
3. three
   

1. four
   
2. five
   
3. six
   

Attachment #0 of entry #0 not found
Please use your browser's back button to go back

I intend to create a script that updates one of our elog logbooks based on mails it receives. I was hoping to be able to do this using the "elog" command line tool. Adding a new entry works fine, as does "replying" to an existing entry. The only thing I cannot get to work is editing an existing entry. All entries ahve several attributes and I intend not to use the "message" itself. I tried the following (on the machine this elogd is running on):

1. Create a new entry with Attribute1 set to "value":
   

   elog -a 'Attribute1=value' -x -h localhost -l 'LOGBOOK' -p 8080 -u USER PASSWD

   This works - the entry gets created and is displayed properly.
NOTE: I found that this does not work if LOGBOOK has any spaces in it - I would get error messages where the logbook was not found.
 

2. Edit this entry to set a second attribute:

   elog -e 1 -a 'Attribute2=something' -x -h localhost -l 'LOGBOOK' -p 8080 -u USER PASSWD

   The result was: Error transmitting message. Running the same command with -v gives me a whole bunch of text with at the end this message (I've stripped the HTML): "This entry has in meantime been modified by someone else. Submitting it now would overwrite the other modification and is therefore prohibited." However, I know for certain that this entry is not being editied by anyone at that moment, so I'm wondering what I'm doing wrong here...

I am using 2.3.4 and I am still having this problem.  If someone posts a
message with an attachment, and I then reply to that message, the attachment
gets 'deattached' from that message.  However, the file is still in the
logbook directory, so it is possible to recover it, but it did cause a slight
panic the first time it happened :)

I see there is a 2.3.5 version now, but the changelog doesn't say anything
about this problem, so I have not tried it yet.

Is there a 'trick' to fix this problem?

EDIT: I noticed when I replyed to your message, your elog.cfg attachment is
no longer there.  So it appears it's not fixed in 2.3.5 either..


> This is a known problem and has been fixed in version 2.3.4, which has been 
> released today. To prove that it's working, I attached the current 
> elogd.cfg from this forum.

EDIT: I downloaded the latest elogd.c from CVS, replaced the one from the
latest tar, and recompiled.  Worked great!

Thanks for the prompt response, Stefan!

> > I am using 2.3.4 and I am still having this problem.  If someone posts a
> > message with an attachment, and I then reply to that message, the attachment
> > gets 'deattached' from that message.  However, the file is still in the
> > logbook directory, so it is possible to recover it, but it did cause a 
> slight
> > panic the first time it happened :)
> 
> Uups, that is indeed a problem. I found that it was unrelated to the first 
> one, so it was there since quite some time now. I fixed it. It will come out 
> in 2.3.6 or can be obtained already now from CVS. It is trongly recommended 
> to upgrade all installations to avoid this problem.

I've been using elog for several months now, and one thing that's always
seemed odd to me are the things like max number of attachments and max
attachment size are defined right in the source code, and not in the config
file.  It would seem that it would be simple to be able to define stuff like
that in the config file (and have defaults in case they weren't specified),
which would fix a lot of the recompiling problems - just edit the config file
and restart elog.  Not that recompiling elog is difficult, it just seems like
recompiling for such a simple setting is overkill...

Anyway, just curious.  Is there a technical reason this is not done?

Justin

> source of it. The reply/attachment bug is fixed, and a warning about 
> exceeding the number of attachments will come soon.

Heya, I've been using elog for a year or so, with a proxy through Apache,
but recently I've ran into some trouble with my Apache config, where
spammers were using my incorrectly configured proxy to send spam.

I have
some requests for the Administrator's Guide: "Running elogd under Apache". 
I'm hoping a few little notes will save others the trouble I've gone
through. Neither of these are any fault of elog's or Apache's, but of my own
ignorance. (I am using elog 2.3.9, and Apache 2.something, if that matters)

1) When doing "ProxyPass ..." when setting up elog under Apache, do NOT put
"ProxyRequests On".  This is not needed, if it is enabled and not set up
correctly, it allows spammers to send spam via Apache's proxy.  More
information on this is here: http://www.apacheweek.com/issues/03-07-25,
about halfway down the page, under "Spammers use open Apache proxies"

Even though it doesn't mention ProxyRequests in the guide, I think there
should be a little side note mentioning that "ProxyRequests On" is NOT
needed, because I put it in, thinking it was - I am probably not the only one.

2) I have found that mod_proxy_http.c must be loaded in addition to
mod_proxy.c and mod_alias.c for the proxy to work, otherwise I get a 403
error.  I think this should be mentioned as well.