Re: Increment a field automatically on a new thread vs every entry, posted by Chuck Brost on Fri Apr 25 19:33:24 2008
|
Ok, nevermind that one, Dumb Question I think, now that I have figured out that the field I was concerned with does not increment in a reply already. So.. that only leaves my one question, is there somewhere that I can change the text, not the action, on the menu so that I can do a reply, but have the link list as something like "New Item".?
| Chuck Brost wrote: |
|
I may have missed it when reading the logs, if so, sorry about that, but I would like to know if there is a way to set a field, let us call it "process run" Ok let me give you some details on this.
a process run may have several "work orders" or sets of parts/items in it, so it will have several separate entries in the log such as:
date##, run123, part 1, quantity, comment
date##, run123, part2, quantity, comment
date##, run123, part3, quantity, comment
date##, run123, part4, quantity, comment
I thought perhaps to have them use the reply function to add the other 3 items of the same run, and that would work if I could find a way to set 'process run' to auto increment, say perhaps, when the next 'New' entry was entered. Is there something in place that can already do this? If this is possible, I thought I would see if I can change the button for 'New' to something like 'New Run' and reply to 'Add Workorder' or something along that line so there is no confusion when entering the data.
Any suggestions you might provide are greatfully accepted.
Chuck
|
|
|
Re: Increment a field automatically on a new thread vs every entry, posted by Stefan Ritt on Sat Apr 26 09:26:53 2008
|
| Chuck Brost wrote: |
|
Ok, nevermind that one, Dumb Question I think, now that I have figured out that the field I was concerned with does not increment in a reply already. So.. that only leaves my one question, is there somewhere that I can change the text, not the action, on the menu so that I can do a reply, but have the link list as something like "New Item".?
|
Unfortunately this is not possible at the moment. |
|
Re: Increase attachment file size for elog command line client, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Oct 14 10:28:48 2002
|
> Hi,
>
> I am having trouble modifying the elog client to allow larger
attachment. I
> have elogd configure for attchment sizes of 10Meg and I would like the
> option to be able to use the elog client. Can anyone give me key points
as
> to how to go about doing this? I have tried but I must be missing
something.
>
> Also, as a suggestion, it might make sense to add a MAX_ATTACHMENT_SIZE
def
> in a common header file.
>
> Thanks
> Kevin
I modified the elog program such that the attachment buffer is dynamically
allocated which means that it works with any size. Please find the updated
version at
http://midas.psi.ch/cgi-bin/cvsweb/~checkout~/elog/elog.c?rev=1.10
Note that for attachments larger than ~2MB, one hase to increase the
WEB_BUFFER_SIZE in elogd.c.
- Stefan |
Re: Incorrect Display, posted by David Spindler on Sat May 21 15:23:08 2005 
|
| David Spindler wrote: | I hope this is the correct place for an apparent bug report. The display is incorrect except when displaying a particular entry. I just downloaded 2.6.0-beta thinking I was getting 2.5.9. Nice surprise. The elcode (bbcode? ) is a great idea, but the display, when showing the main screen of a logbook does not have the correct fields showing in the correct places. I will attach two screen captures for illustraton. Never mind, I guess not. It is not letting me upload the screen captures. On the main screen, for example, my field contents for "Route" appear in the "Text" field. But when on the specific entry screen, these field contents are in the correct field. I will be glad to eamil the screen captures, if anyone wants.
I am running Firefox 1.0.3 (same results with IE 6, BTW), on a WinXP OS (sorry fellows, but I am still in process of learning Linux, so I have not tried this version of elog on it, yet), on a Gateway 2.2 GHZ, 1 GB RAM PC.
BTW, I love elog and have it running at work. It is being used extensively. |
I guess it did upload. Here is the other screen capture.
BTW, I received the following message upon submitting my last post:
| Quote: | | "Error sending Email via "mailsend.psi.ch": malformed address: <>" |
|
|
Re: Incorrect Display, posted by David Spindler on Mon May 23 17:47:24 2005
|
Never mind. I figured it out. I used two fields (date and time) that are automatically placed in elog. It messed up the spacing, altough what was puzzling was that it displayed correctly on the entry itself, but not the list. Anyway, I renamed the date and time to another name and it is ok.
Thanks, anyway. Keep up the good work.
| David Spindler wrote: |
| David Spindler wrote: | I hope this is the correct place for an apparent bug report. The display is incorrect except when displaying a particular entry. I just downloaded 2.6.0-beta thinking I was getting 2.5.9. Nice surprise. The elcode (bbcode? ) is a great idea, but the display, when showing the main screen of a logbook does not have the correct fields showing in the correct places. I will attach two screen captures for illustraton. Never mind, I guess not. It is not letting me upload the screen captures. On the main screen, for example, my field contents for "Route" appear in the "Text" field. But when on the specific entry screen, these field contents are in the correct field. I will be glad to eamil the screen captures, if anyone wants.
I am running Firefox 1.0.3 (same results with IE 6, BTW), on a WinXP OS (sorry fellows, but I am still in process of learning Linux, so I have not tried this version of elog on it, yet), on a Gateway 2.2 GHZ, 1 GB RAM PC.
BTW, I love elog and have it running at work. It is being used extensively. |
I guess it did upload. Here is the other screen capture.
BTW, I received the following message upon submitting my last post:
| Quote: | | "Error sending Email via "mailsend.psi.ch": malformed address: <>" |
|
|
|
Re: Incorrect Display, posted by Geoffrey Carman on Fri Jun 3 17:34:44 2005
|
| David Spindler wrote: |
BTW, I love elog and have it running at work. It is being used extensively. |
We just did the 2.60 beta upgrade, and now our pre-existing logbooks, with a
List Display = Name, Author, Date for example will only show the first two fields.
It seems like Elog is dropping the last attribute in the List Display line.
We can 'fix' it by making it say:
List Display = Name, Author, Date, Date
so that it drops the second Date, but that is a bad workaround.
Anyone else seeing this?
Elog 2.60 beta on Linux, Firefox 1.04 as the client. Or IE fully patched on WinXP SP2.
PS: Love Elog at work here too! Truly has made our documentation way better. And RSS feeds of the logbooks is just wonderful. |
|
Re: Incorrect Display, posted by Emiliano Gabrielli on Fri Jun 3 18:02:25 2005
|
| Geoffrey Carman wrote: |
| David Spindler wrote: |
BTW, I love elog and have it running at work. It is being used extensively. |
We just did the 2.60 beta upgrade, and now our pre-existing logbooks, with a
List Display = Name, Author, Date for example will only show the first two fields.
It seems like Elog is dropping the last attribute in the List Display line.
We can 'fix' it by making it say:
List Display = Name, Author, Date, Date
so that it drops the second Date, but that is a bad workaround.
Anyone else seeing this?
Elog 2.60 beta on Linux, Firefox 1.04 as the client. Or IE fully patched on WinXP SP2.
PS: Love Elog at work here too! Truly has made our documentation way better. And RSS feeds of the logbooks is just wonderful. |
I just reported it to Stefan last week ... it's the "pippo-bug"  I called it this way becouse you can put anything you want as garbage Attribute to go around the bug .. I temporary corrected my elogs configs addig a ", pippo" to every "List Display" line ... |
|
Re: Incorrect Display, posted by Stefan Ritt on Sat Jun 4 10:59:52 2005
|
I finally found some time to fix the pippo-bug  .
It had to do with the request that one can turn on and off the summary lines of the text body in Guest list display. So if this option does not contain Text, the text summary is not shown for guest access, but only for registered access. This modification had the side effect that one column was dropped on the non-guest access. |
|