> > BUG#1
> 
> Has been fixed. New version under CVS.

Thanks for that, Stefan.

> > BUG#2
> > In single entry view, elog returns an unformatted date value for "Type =
> > date" attributes - even when it has been manually entered with the date picker.
> 
> Can't reproduce that. Used your config, got the display attached.

Nor can I in the new version.  Forgive me if I don't investigate further. ;-)

> > since the new server isn't standing here in my office i can not test if older elog  
> > versions don't have the problem too. but if your idea of stack or buffer overflow  
> > is right, i guess that hoping of the helpfull ms pach or a update of the compiler  
> > will be the only what we could do  :-(  it's always the same using software fom a  
> > company named "kleinstweich"...  ;-(  
>  
> ;-))) like that one... 
>  
> I tried to reduce the memory consumption in the threaded display, can you please try  
> the modified version under 
>  
> http://midas.psi.ch/elog/download/windows/elogd.exe 
 
just was back from work today! i have installed the new elogd.exe file (after a 
backup!  :-)  ) and restarted the service. there are basicalle two news, a really good 
one an a bad one: 
 
1. the bad: clicking for a threaded display of the logs will still produce an porobem 
as shown in the screendump of the win 2k3 remote controle console (jpeg-attachement). 
 
2. the really good one: the BIG difference to the original 2.5.1 elogd.exe are two 
points: 
2a) the elgog.exe no more hangs! after a while it comes back to the view before 
clicking threaded view. while trying to dispaly the thread it seems to hang, but just 
semms! (white browser, nothing to see) 
2b) after quitting the error it's bossible to use eleg as normal. no restart of the 
service is more needed. before, a restart of the service has to be done because elogd 
was hanging compleatly. 
 
as you tought, it looks like a stack problem ore someting else. sorry, didn't had 
time enough to find out detailed information of 2k3. also develeoper network from ms 
dosn't bring detailed information about memory handling to the public guys  like me. 
 
the other solution my be, as i wrote, to have a switch for switching of threaded 
display, even a treaded view may be very helpfull in an discussion forum. maybe the 
compiler may coming up with a new version or ms will make a pach, for someting 
absolutly different of course  ;-)  , solving this probleme... 
 
ueli 
 
 

> BUG#1

Has been fixed. New version under CVS.

> BUG#2
> In single entry view, elog returns an unformatted date value for "Type =
> date" attributes - even when it has been manually entered with the date picker.

Can't reproduce that. Used your config, got the display attached.

> since the new server isn't standing here in my office i can not test if older elog 
> versions don't have the problem too. but if your idea of stack or buffer overflow 
> is right, i guess that hoping of the helpfull ms pach or a update of the compiler 
> will be the only what we could do  :-(  it's always the same using software fom a 
> company named "kleinstweich"...  ;-( 

;-))) like that one...

I tried to reduce the memory consumption in the threaded display, can you please try 
the modified version under

http://midas.psi.ch/elog/download/windows/elogd.exe

I must have misunderstood what you meant. That aside, I don't know how to compile 
the elogd.c so any help would be appreciated. I would like to learn how to also.
Thanks.

> > I even upgraded to the 2.5.1 version. Then I placed the elogd.c in the SRC 
> > folder. Also placed the images in the themes folder.
> 
> As I wrote, you have to get the latest elogd.c, revision 1.272 and *COMPILE* it 
> (or wait for the next official release). If you cannot compile elogd.c, let me 
> know and I can send you the executable.

BUG#1
Given:

Attributes = Category, Status, Started, Finished, Activity, Headline
Type Started = date
Type Finished = date
Options Status = 1-To Do{1}, 2-Opened{2}, 3-Closed{3}, 4-Suspended{4}
{2} Preset Started = $date
{3} Preset Finished = $date
{4} Preset Finished = $date

There seems to be no setting of Date format (or Time format?) that gives a
meaningful value to attributes Started or Finished.  Even "Date format = %s"
- which gives number of seconds since 1970 - gives bad results.

BUG#2
In single entry view, elog returns an unformatted date value for "Type =
date" attributes - even when it has been manually entered with the date picker.

> I agree. It's most probably a stack overflow problem. The stack size must be 
less  
> on a win 2003 server compared to a xp machine. I know that the threaded display  
> requires some more stack space than the other displays. But unfortunately I have  
> no win 2003 server here to try. 
 
since the new server isn't standing here in my office i can not test if older elog 
versions don't have the problem too. but if your idea of stack or buffer overflow 
is right, i guess that hoping of the helpfull ms pach or a update of the compiler 
will be the only what we could do  :-(  it's always the same using software fom a 
company named "kleinstweich"...  ;-( 
 
is there a posibility in elog to switch off the threaded view or to say what kind 
of views are allowed? this would be helpfull in this case as well as it may be  a 
nice feature for other users too. elog is very powerfull, fo some users i think 
too powerfull with to many possibilities. i think about something like you made in 
the menu / guest menu option or maybe a flag to say "don't" make threaded dispaly 
possible", like e-mail formating or something else? 
 
 

> the problem only ocures on win 2003 server. I d'dn't test it under xp, 2000, 
> 2002 beause i don't have any of this systems. but it looks that no one else 
> has this problem. would be helpfull to know if there anybody out in 
> cyberspase using elog 2.5.1 with win 2000 or 2002 or even better with win 
> 2003 server? or do you have a 2003 server at psi? 
> for me it looks like a incompatibility of a stack, boffer overrun or somethin 
> in the memory.

I agree. It's most probably a stack overflow problem. The stack size must be less 
on a win 2003 server compared to a xp machine. I know that the threaded display 
requires some more stack space than the other displays. But unfortunately I have 
no win 2003 server here to try.