OK +1 to these.
Ralph > On Oct 26, 2020, at 8:57 AM, Davyd McColl <dav...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Ralph, here's the 2.0.12 thread where Matt and Remko voted. > > -d > > > On October 23, 2020 17:57:31 Davyd McColl <dav...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Thanks Matt >> >> I think I need 3 to release... Any other takers? >> >> -d >> >> >> On October 23, 2020 17:33:19 Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> It seems I forgot to add my +1 here. >>> >>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 01:45, Davyd McColl <dav...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Remko >>>> >>>> Yes, this is a vote thread -- thanks for your +1 (: >>>> >>>> Matt, I've fortunately found that the maintainer of gulp-zip did a minor >>>> release which sorts out the issue -- I was behind by one minor and the code >>>> that I saw, _not_ setting mode on folders is the fix... I've updated the >>>> release at >>>> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4net/releases/tag/rc%2F2.0.12 and have >>>> tested the source zip. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> -d >>>> >>>> On 2020/10/19 08:25:06, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Is this not a vote thread? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> > On Oct 19, 2020, at 13:27, Matt Sicker wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Interesting. Anyways, as there are workarounds, it’s not a release >>>> > blocker >>>> > at least. >>>> > >>>> >> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 23:14 Davyd McColl wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> Hi Matt >>>> >> >>>> >> Looks like the culprit is gulp-zip, specifically, the source I see sets >>>> >> mode for files but not folders (with a source comment about why and a >>>> >> link >>>> >> to some other issue). Since there are people with issues open since 2016 >>>> >> and I don't see a way to change this behavior with arguments, this looks >>>> >> like yet another npm module I'll have to fork and maintain myself (or >>>> >> copy, >>>> >> embed and fix in log4net, at the very least). May take me a little >>>> >> while. >>>> >> >>>> >> -d >>>> >> >>>> >>> On October 18, 2020 22:24:41 Matt Sicker wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I've tried extracting it via unzip, tar, and the built in macOS GUI >>>> >>> unzipper, and all three respect the permissions specified which cause >>>> >>> permissions errors on unix. Being that this release is to help fix >>>> >>> something for non-windows users, it'll be hard for them to use any of >>>> >>> the artifacts besides the nupkg (which is likely the more frequently >>>> >>> used artifact I'd imagine). Doing a zipinfo on the nupkg file notes >>>> >>> that it's encoded using zip 2.0 in fat permissions format while the >>>> >>> source and binary zips are encoded from zip 6.3 in unix permissions >>>> >>> format. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> What you might want to figure out is how to make the win32 zippers >>>> >>> _not_ add unix permissions since they're doing it wrong. :) >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, 18 Oct 2020 at 13:55, Davyd McColl wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Matt >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Zip files are created from windows as there are certain targets that >>>> >>>> Unix compiles can't hit (specifically < net40 and client profiles), >>>> >>>> which >>>> >>>> would probably explain the permissions. Not a lot I can do about it >>>> though, >>>> >>>> that I know of. If it's an issue and someone knows how to convince >>>> >>>> win32 >>>> >>>> zippers to do Unix permissions, I'm all ears. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -d >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On October 18, 2020 20:07:18 Matt Sicker wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Signatures and checksums are good. Once I extracted the zips, though, >>>> >>>>> I see they have some strange permissions configured. All the >>>> >>>>> directories have a chmod of rw-rw-rw (just like all the files do), >>>> >>>>> but >>>> >>>>> they should be rwxr-xr-x. Example output from zipinfo comparing >>>> >>>>> log4net zip with log4j zip: >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Archive: apache-log4j-2.13.3-bin.zip >>>> >>>>> Zip file size: 14581816 bytes, number of entries: 74 >>>> >>>>> drwxr-xr-x 2.0 unx 0 b- stor 20-May-10 12:06 >>>> >>>>> apache-log4j-2.13.3-bin/ >>>> >>>>> -rw-r--r-- 2.0 unx 2888 bl defN 20-May-10 11:56 >>>> >>>>> apache-log4j-2.13.3-bin/RELEASE-NOTES.md >>>> >>>>> ... >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Archive: apache-log4net-binaries-2.0.12.zip >>>> >>>>> Zip file size: 2154452 bytes, number of entries: 28 >>>> >>>>> drw-rw-rw- 6.3 unx 0 b- stor 20-Oct-18 17:22 net20/ >>>> >>>>> ... >>>> >>>>> -rw-rw-rw- 6.3 unx 262144 b- defN 20-Oct-18 17:22 net20/log4net.dll >>>> >>>>> ... >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> The directories need to be executable to be able to list files from >>>> >>>>> them (Unix/POSIX). I'm not sure how these zip files got these >>>> >>>>> permissions. I see that the previous 2.0.10 release of log4net has >>>> >>>>> the >>>> >>>>> same problem, though. >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> On Sun, 18 Oct 2020 at 11:03, Davyd McColl wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Hi all >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Not much has changed in 2.0.12 except that an issue affecting >>>> >>>>>> non-windows users has been addressed. LOG4NET-652 and LOG4NET-653 >>>> both stem >>>> >>>>>> from the same source, wherein the username for the current logging >>>> thread >>>> >>>>>> was not correctly retrieved on non-windows platforms and would >>>> >>>>>> throw a >>>> >>>>>> PlatformNotSupported error. I was hoping that one of the authors of >>>> >>>>>> pull >>>> >>>>>> requests to resolve this would respond to my comments on said pull >>>> >>>>>> requests, but it's been a while now and there's been a user asking >>>> when the >>>> >>>>>> update would be released, so, as much as I would have liked the >>>> community >>>> >>>>>> member commits, I've gone ahead and applied the logic myself. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Anyways, 2.0.12 is up for release at >>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4net/releases/tag/rc%2F2.0.12 [ >>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4net/releases/tag/rc%2F2.0.12] >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> with signed artifacts there. Documentation is updated at the staging >>>> site >>>> >>>>>> -- all that's left is a sanity check and vote before I can push the >>>> nupkg >>>> >>>>>> to nuget.org, which is how most people will consume it. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Ralph, as far as I understand, I still don't have the ability to >>>> >>>>>> push >>>> >>>>>> artifacts to the apache download server, so please could you do so >>>> for me? >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Thanks for your time >>>> >>>>>> -d >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>> -- >>>> >>>>> Matt Sicker >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>>> >>> Matt Sicker >>>> >>> >>>> >> -- >>>> > Matt Sicker >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
