Demo Discussion
Forum Config Examples Contributions Vulnerabilities
  Discussion forum about ELOG, Page 236 of 801  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Icon Author Author Email Category OS ELOG Version Subjectdown
  65810   Fri Apr 4 22:06:48 2008 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chRequestAll Re: attachment indicator in summary view

Dennis Seitz wrote:

 It would be nice to have the option of including an attachment indicator column in summary view to show if an entry has any attachments.

Nice idea. I implemented that feature, as can be seen at the contributions logbook for example. It will be contained in the next release.

  65811   Fri Apr 4 22:53:17 2008 Reply Edmundo T Rodriguezedrodrig@chpnet.orgRequestAll Re: attachment indicator in summary view

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Dennis Seitz wrote:

 It would be nice to have the option of including an attachment indicator column in summary view to show if an entry has any attachments.

Nice idea. I implemented that feature, as can be seen at the contributions logbook for example. It will be contained in the next release.

Would it be possible to instead of appearing a "clip" and/or "multiple-clips" (as the number of attachments grow) to appear a number which will be = to the count of attachments to avoid the column become too wide?

Hope it works because this is tool better every day.

Keep up the GOOD Work!

  65812   Sat Apr 5 00:43:21 2008 Smile Dennis Seitzdseitz@cosmology.berkeley.eduRequestAll Re: attachment indicator in summary view

 

Stefan Ritt wrote:

 

Dennis Seitz wrote:

 It would be nice to have the option of including an attachment indicator column in summary view to show if an entry has any attachments.

 

Nice idea. I implemented that feature, as can be seen at the contributions logbook for example. It will be contained in the next release.

Thanks!

 

  65816   Mon Apr 7 10:01:27 2008 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chRequestAll Re: attachment indicator in summary view

Edmundo T Rodriguez wrote:

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Dennis Seitz wrote:

 It would be nice to have the option of including an attachment indicator column in summary view to show if an entry has any attachments.

Nice idea. I implemented that feature, as can be seen at the contributions logbook for example. It will be contained in the next release.

Would it be possible to instead of appearing a "clip" and/or "multiple-clips" (as the number of attachments grow) to appear a number which will be = to the count of attachments to avoid the column become too wide?

Ok, so I show individual clips up to five, and the number of attachments if more than five.

  65828   Sat Apr 12 22:04:58 2008 Reply Grant Jeffcotegrant@jeffcote.orgRequestAll Re: attachment indicator in summary view

Hi Stefan,

When using  2.7.3-2095 I can't seem to get the paperclip/s to show,  just an additional field in the summary view (named Attachments) with the attachment file names below? Am I missing something?

Thanks

 

Dennis Seitz wrote

 

Stefan Ritt wrote:

 

Dennis Seitz wrote:

 It would be nice to have the option of including an attachment indicator column in summary view to show if an entry has any attachments.

 

Nice idea. I implemented that feature, as can be seen at the contributions logbook for example. It will be contained in the next release.

Thanks!

 

  65829   Sun Apr 13 16:04:09 2008 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chRequestAll Re: attachment indicator in summary view

Grant Jeffcote wrote:

When using  2.7.3-2095 I can't seem to get the paperclip/s to show,  just an additional field in the summary view (named Attachments) with the attachment file names below? Am I missing something?

 

Yes, you miss the paperlclip icon. Get it from here and copy it under elog/themes/default/attachment.png.

  66826   Tue May 18 16:40:15 2010 Reply Stefan Rittstefan.ritt@psi.chBug reportAllsvnRe: attachment filename bug & Makefile issue
> If I upload the file "000000_000000_file.txt", elog will chop the filename to "file.txt."  Also, this effects
> the file's displayed "Uploaded" time.  It shows the file as being uploaded on: "Tue Nov 30 00:00:00 1999"

Arghh! Why did you choose such a filename? This is the ELOG internal file format, which is YYMMDD_HHMMSS_name.ext. 
For internal reasons (mainly for synchronization) the system checks every file name, and if it contains 6 numbers 
followed by a "_" followed by 6 other numbers it thinks it's a valid date/time and uses that. Your time is however 
0.0.0000, that's why it gets converted to some date in 1999. Do you absolutely need this functionality? While I can 
easily remove the interpretation of the date, it would break the synchronization functionality and I would have to 
find some other method to pass the file date/time, which would be quite some work. So if it's not too important for 
you, I would like to keep it as it is.

> Makefile has the line:
> 
> # flag for SSL support
> USE_SSL    = 1
> 
> However setting USE_SSL = 0 does not prevent the openssl libraries from being used.  Same issue with USE_CRYPT.
>  You have to comment them out.
> 
> Lines 76-85 of Makefile should be replaced with this:
> 
> ifdef USE_SSL
> ifneq ($(USE_SSL), 0)
> CFLAGS += -DHAVE_SSL
> LIBS += -lssl
> endif
> endif
> 
> ifdef USE_CRYPT
> ifneq ($(USE_CRYPT), 0)
> CFLAGS += -DHAVE_CRYPT
> LIBS += -lcrypt
> endif
> endif

The original idea was that one outcomments the whole line, like

#USE_SSL = 1

which always worked, but I agree that your solution is more general, so I changed the official Makefile. Thanks for 
that.
  66830   Thu May 20 04:33:07 2010 Reply A. Martinamartin@example.comBug reportAllsvnRe: attachment filename bug & Makefile issue


> > If I upload the file "000000_000000_file.txt", elog will chop the filename to "file.txt."  Also, this effects
> > the file's displayed "Uploaded" time.  It shows the file as being uploaded on: "Tue Nov 30 00:00:00 1999"
> 
> Arghh! Why did you choose such a filename? This is the ELOG internal file format, which is YYMMDD_HHMMSS_name.ext. 
> For internal reasons (mainly for synchronization) the system checks every file name, and if it contains 6 numbers 
> followed by a "_" followed by 6 other numbers it thinks it's a valid date/time and uses that. Your time is however 
> 0.0.0000, that's why it gets converted to some date in 1999. Do you absolutely need this functionality? While I can 
> easily remove the interpretation of the date, it would break the synchronization functionality and I would have to 
> find some other method to pass the file date/time, which would be quite some work. So if it's not too important for 
> you, I would like to keep it as it is.
> 

Thank you for your response.  

I can certainly use another filename, but I'm curious why elog doesn't convert the filename "000000_000000_file.txt" to
"YYMMDD_HHMMSS_000000_000000_file.txt" when it gets uploaded.  All other files are automatically prepended with this
string.  Manually renaming the file and then editing the elog entry via text editor seems to fix the file.

thanks,
amartin
ELOG V3.1.5-3fb85fa6