LogViewPlus Support » LogViewPlus Support » Features & Suggestions » Parser Support for opening Analysis zip files

Parser Support for opening Analysis zip files

Memnarch1113 — Thu, 09 Dec 2021 08:52:26 GMT

Hi folks,
I ran into an issue that I solved, but that I think could probably be mitigated against. I read several different log files and I download a lot of copies with the same name, so my log files end up having the name:

logFile.log (2)

That happens a lot, so I set my parser's file name pattern to be:

logFile.log*

And that does a great job! The problem is, I just went to save an analysis package of a bunch of logs I was looking through, and when I tried to re-open that package, LogViewPlus tried to use my customized parser instead of the comma-deliminated one that should be used for an analysis package. This is because the log file in the package was renamed:

logFile.log.lvp

But it still matched the logFile.log* argument!

I looked and I didn't see a specific parser for .lvp files, so I couldn't bump it up in the priority list of Parser Mappings. I ended up solving this problem by making a regex for my personal parser so that it wouldn't accidentally apply to .lvp files anymore, but I figured I'd put in a feature request for a way to properly handle .lvp files, especially when they're coming from an analysis package.

RE: Parser Support for opening Analysis zip files

LogViewPlus Support — Thu, 09 Dec 2021 08:52:26 GMT

Hi Memnarch,

I just wanted to let you know that this issue has been resolved in the latest LogViewPlus beta release v2.5.44.

Thanks for your help identifying this issue!

Toby

RE: Parser Support for opening Analysis zip files

LogViewPlus Support — Thu, 30 Sep 2021 16:58:05 GMT

Hi Memnarch,

The problem makes sense and it should be an easy fix on our end. I will make sure this gets resolved in the next release.

Just to let you know, *.lvp files are a built in type so they are not explicitly listed in the Parser Configuration settings. This is by design and normally works well, but I can see why it caused confusion in this case.

Thanks for bringing this issue to our attention!

Toby