| ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
|
1354
|
Thu Jul 28 03:08:19 2005 |
 | PJ Meyer | pjm@pjmeyer.org | | Windows | 2.60 beta3 | Re: Problems with beta 3 (Follow-on to CVS/XML msg 1296) |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| PJ Meyer wrote: | but something happened to the css.
i'm getting white background and no icons anywhere.
so tried to install in a clean location as it comes out of the box with no changes. get white background, no colour.
tried moving css files, graphic files, etc, around - nothing.
emptied bowser caches (IE and Opera)
deleted appropriate cookies
stop and started many time.
and still at the end of the day - i get a white background only, no colour what so ever.
also get page not found when clicking on a row to edit entry.
example: http://dhsdlj159941.hr.state.or.us/demo/1
is record #1 in demo table, elog can't display it when i click on it in the list window.
any ideas? |
That's strange. Can you check if elog finds it's own host properly? The CSS file should be under
http://dhsdlj159941.hr.state.or.us/demo/default.css
and if you look at the HTML source of you standard page you should see something like:
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="http://dhsdlj159941.hr.state.or.us/demo/default.css">
Could it be that elog places something else than "dhsdlj159941.hr.state.or.us" as the host name? If so, you could override this with following statement in elogd.cfg:
URL = http://dhsdlj159941.hr.state.or.us/
That should also fix your other problem. |
OK tried all that and nothing. html source reads like it should.
I can see the discussion/forum here site as it should be
I updated a working setup from 2.54 to 2.60.beta3 and I get the white background with no colours on the restart of Elogd. Going back to 2.54 brought back the colours.
this is the source <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="http://ISE-DEVEL1-OLD/default.css">.
Works in 2.54, does not seem to work in 2.60beta3
I've tried coping the default.css file to everyplace i could think of and then a few more places. 
This has happened on NT 4 server, 2000 server, and XP client machines. Brand new installs (server never saw elog before), upgrades in place, etc, etc, etc. Wish we could run linux in the shop.
Tried in the cfg file:
Resource dir = c:\e-log
Logbook dir = c:\e-log\logbooks
Theme = default
CSS = default.css
This is so strange.
Any ideas on where to go in trouble shooting this? |
|
1353
|
Thu Jul 28 01:02:00 2005 |
 | John Habermann | john.habermann@wilderness.org.au | Bug report | Linux | 2.5.9+r16 | problem with list display attribute | I not sure if this has been found and fixed as I did find something to do with the list display attribute in the forums but wasn't sure if it was the same thing.
There seems to be a bug with the List Display attribute in that it drops the last attribute of the list. So in my example if I want to display the Subject in my list I have to add a dummy attribute after it otherwise the Subject will not be displayed. The comma after Subject is not enough, but all you have to do is to add 1 letter and then you will see the subject in List view. If you don't all I see is the Date and Author fields and then the Text field in my Summary view in the log book.
List Display = Date,Author,Subject,t
I am running elog 2.5.9+r1674-1 on Debian sarge. |
|
1352
|
Wed Jul 27 21:22:47 2005 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Linux | 2.57-1 | Re: attribute of type "datetime" sorted incorrectly |
| Kees Bol wrote: | | What goes wrong here? |
The wrong sorting is a mystery to me. I redid what you have, and entered exactly the same entries, and got following:
As you can see, the sorting is quite different. What happens if you reload the page, what if you restart elogd?
As for the missing validity check for the date field, all what was missing was the year check. I added that. |
|
1351
|
Wed Jul 27 17:38:25 2005 |
 | Chris Green | greenc@fnal.gov | | | | Notify email recipient of attachments without including? | Hi,
Our elog is going to be taking some large attachments. I've disabled the attachments from going out in the email, but I'd like email recipients to know that the post has attachments associated with it. Is there a mechanism to do this already, or would it be an enhancement? I'm looking for something like:
Email Notify Attachments = 0 | 1 | 2
Where 0 = no notification,
1 = number only,
2 = list
... independent of whether attachments are included with the email itself.
Thanks,
Chris. |
|
1350
|
Wed Jul 27 17:30:38 2005 |
| Chris Green | greenc@fnal.gov | Question | Linux | 2.6.0b3 | Email subject garbaged when set? | Hi,
So I'm using the CVS version now since I was hoping this would be fixed. If I set the email subject explicitly, viz:
Use Email Subject = [BooNE-ELOG] New submission to $logbook from $Author
The email I get has:
Subject:
=?ISO-8859-1?B?W0Jvb05FLUVMT0ddIE5ldyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHRvIENoYXJnZWQgQ3Vyc
mVudCBQaSBQbHVzIGZyb20gQ2hyaXMgR3JlZW4=?=
... which isn't particularly illuminating.
Advice appreciated.
Thanks,
Chris. |
|
1349
|
Wed Jul 27 16:46:44 2005 |
| Kees Bol | kees.bol@wur.nl | Question | Linux | 2.57-1 | attribute of type "datetime" sorted incorrectly | In order to enter different logdates we created the attribute 'Logdate' as follows:
...
Attributes = Logdate, Author, Type, Subject
Type Logdate = datetime
Preset Logdate = $date
List Display = ID, Logdate, Author, Type, Subject
Start page = ?rsort=Logdate
Time format = "%d-%b-%y %H:%M"
Date format = %d-%b-%y
...
However some unexpected things happen:
1) when sorting on Logdate the sorting is incorrect
2) I expected some kind of fieldchecking when filling this field, however you can enter any text.
What goes wrong here?
Thanks |
| Attachment 1: scrap.PNG
|
|
|
1348
|
Wed Jul 27 16:31:33 2005 |
 | Juliana Peng | jpeng@yorku.ca | Request | Linux | V2.6.0 | Re: hide attributes when view the logbook |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
I understood you correctly. What I was trying to say is that what you currently request possible with the current version and will not be implemented soon. But you can partly obtain what you want by having two logbooks. Make one logbook which has fewer attributes, and which will receive all SunOS entries. Make another one with all the attributes. Although this will become separate logooks, you can "think" of them as one logbook with two different sections. There is even the trick of forcing the data directory to be the same (via the "data dir") option, so both logbooks will "look" at the same database. Make one logbook the "master" having all the attributes. That's where you enter your information. Them make one or more logbooks looking at the same data, but make them read-only. Each logbook can have a separate set of attributes, access rights etc, but all of them show the same data.
I know this is not the perfect solution, but at least something which can be done already now. |
Thank you so much. We'll try it. Waiting for your next version. |
|
1347
|
Wed Jul 27 15:56:53 2005 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Request | Linux | V2.6.0 | Re: hide attributes when view the logbook |
| Juliana Peng wrote: | | We don't want separate logbooks, sorry for the misleading. I was trying to put two request together. |
I understood you correctly. What I was trying to say is that what you currently request possible with the current version and will not be implemented soon. But you can partly obtain what you want by having two logbooks. Make one logbook which has fewer attributes, and which will receive all SunOS entries. Make another one with all the attributes. Although this will become separate logooks, you can "think" of them as one logbook with two different sections. There is even the trick of forcing the data directory to be the same (via the "data dir") option, so both logbooks will "look" at the same database. Make one logbook the "master" having all the attributes. That's where you enter your information. Them make one or more logbooks looking at the same data, but make them read-only. Each logbook can have a separate set of attributes, access rights etc, but all of them show the same data.
I know this is not the perfect solution, but at least something which can be done already now. |
|