ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
690
|
Wed Sep 8 12:36:08 2004 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Linux | 2.5.4 | Re: write access for elogd | > Newly installed elog gives this response when I try to submit a new record:
>
> New entry cannot be written to directory "./logbooks/Linux/"
> Please check that it exists and elogd has write access
>
> I started the daemon. I've not yet assigned passwords -- just checking
> things out. How can I create this access to my own directory?
First, find out under which account the daemon is running. It you account if
you start it interactively, if you installed from the RPM, an account "elog" is
created. Then make sure that the account under which elogd is running has write
access to the ./logbooks/Linux/ directory. One common problem is that people
start the daemon the first time under their account, which causes elogd to
create the logbook directory under the user name. If elogd is later started
under the account "elog" this one of course does not have access to the
directory. A
chown -R elog.elog /usr/local/elog/
issued as root could help in that case. Please replace /usr/local/elog with the
directory where elog is installed. |
689
|
Wed Sep 8 12:25:20 2004 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | | Linux | | Re: Admin rights lost after upgrade 2.5.2 to 2.5.4 | > Somehow elogd 2.5.4 treat all users as normal user. When clicking on
> "config". All admin users has no "change elogd.cfg" button. Revert back to
> 2.5.2 OK.
>
> Is there anything I need to change to upgrade other than replaceing elogd?
> Clearing the cookies didn't help.
The button name has been changed from "change elogd.cfg" to "change config file"
since the file name is now variable (can be changed during compile time). But I
guess this is not your problem.
Can you try with the demo logbook (contained in the distribution). Just add
"password file = ..." and "admin user = ..." to the sample elogd.cfg. If I do that
here, everything works fine. You also can send me your elogd.cfg so I can have a look. |
688
|
Wed Sep 8 12:19:00 2004 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Bug report | All | 2.5.4-2 | Re: URL bug in elogd.cfg | This problem has been fixed in revision 1.462 |
687
|
Wed Sep 8 11:44:56 2004 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | All | 2.5.4 | Re: Q: on 'FIND MENU commands =' <menu list> | > Hmmm. I like the little buttons with the pull-downs for selections.
> Unfortunately, I don't get that. With a config of:
>
> Find Menu commands = New, Find, Select, Config, Change password, Logout, Help, Admin
> Menu commands = Back, New, Edit, Delete, Reply, Find, Move To, Copy To, Config, Help
Unfortunately menu commands are case sensitive, so you need a "Move to" instead a "Move
To". I changed this in the code so future versions will not be case sensitive any more.
> BTW, on a log entry screen, is the appropriate behavior for the "Move To" option
> to show multiple "Move To" links (one for each logbook) or should there also be
> pulldowns?
On the log entry screen, only menu links are possible for internal reasons, that's why I
have chosen that display mode. I agree that it can look clumsy if you have many
logbooks, but there is the "move to = <logbook list>" option to restrict the number of
target logbooks. |
686
|
Tue Sep 7 17:49:50 2004 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Linux | 2.5.3 | Re: Options Items limits | > > Hello friends,
> >
> > Exist some form to increase limits of items (100) in the Options List
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for any help
>
> I believe only through an edit of the C code and a recompile, as the values
> are set as constants. I think this might be the line:
>
> #define MAX_N_LIST 100
>
> So, yes, there exists a way and the ease of this way is dependent upon your
> comfort level with changing stefan's code.
Agree. The only potential problem is that if this value becomes too big, you
will get a stack overflow from time to time. So best is experiment yourself a
bit. A avlue of 150 or so should be no problem.
- Stefan |
685
|
Tue Sep 7 13:05:49 2004 |
| T. Ribbrock | emgaron@gmx.net | Bug fix | Linux | 2.5.4 | Re: text display of ascii files not a good idea | [...]
> Probably it is fine to display only files ending in '.txt' per default.
> In addition a file that has more than say 1000 lines should probably
> also not be displayed (as default, optional OK).
No, '.txt' would definitely not be enough for me. I'm using elog to log all
administration of our network. In many cases, I simply attach a configuration
file. All those files are plain ASCII and none of them end in '.txt' - and I
would most definitely like them to be displayed inline like they are now. In
fact, this change was the main reason for me to upgrade to 2.5.4
Maybe a configuration option or a "display attachment" button would be the
best solution, then?
Cheerio,
Thomas |
684
|
Fri Sep 3 20:17:35 2004 |
| Bryan Moffit | moffit@jlab.org | Question | Linux | 2.5.4 | PostScript Files shown as text. | At some point, in the last week or so, I upgraded the debian-unstable
version (r1459-1) of elog. Now, PostScript files (as attachments) are
displayed (shown in ascii text, instead of just showing the link).
Is there an option in the elog.cfg to only display certain files (like .gif
or .jpg). |
683
|
Fri Sep 3 20:17:20 2004 |
| Bryan Moffit | moffit@jlab.org | | Linux | 2.5.4 | PostScript Files shown as text. | At some point, in the last week or so, I upgraded the debian-unstable
version (r1459-1) of elog. Now, PostScript files (as attachments) are
displayed (shown in ascii text, instead of just showing the link).
Is there an option in the elog.cfg to only display certain files (like .gif
or .jpg). |
|