On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Marc - A. Dahlhaus [ Administration | Westermann GmbH ] <m...@wol.de> wrote: > Am Montag, den 12.10.2009, 18:15 +0200 schrieb Xavier: >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Marc - A. Dahlhaus [ Administration | >> Westermann GmbH ] <m...@wol.de> wrote: >> > >> > They are on different hosts and different carrier networks. >> > They get time updates via ntp from the same source. >> > System times are sane on this boxes. >> > >> >> Anyway we are using ust.mtime from libfetch. I would think this comes >> >> from http Last-Modified and thus should not cause problems. >> >> But I am not sure. I am still trying to understand how this stuff works :) >> > >> > Thanks Xavier, this information was what was missing in this puzzle for >> > me. I sniffed the http headers with tshark and checked what pacman asks >> > for per header and what lighttpd is sending back to pacman in response. >> > This is definitely a lighttpd bug. It answers with "304 not modified" >> > response even if the file was modified because of some missing checks. >> > >> > Sorry for the noise. >> > >> > If anybody is interested, this is the corresponding fix for >> > lighttpd-1.4.23 which will be in 1.4.24 when it gets released: >> > >> > http://redmine.lighttpd.net/projects/lighttpd/repository/revisions/2643/diff/branches/lighttpd-1.4.x/src/http-header-glue.c?format=diff&rev_to=2408 >> > >> >> Ah cool, glad to know it's already figured out :) >> Wasn't it this bug : http://redmine.lighttpd.net/issues/2047 > > Yes, that's the one. > >> The patch linked there look like a subset of your link above. >> But that makes sense because the revision fixing the issue seems to be >> 2608 or 2609 >> and your link above is a diff between 2408 and 2643 >> >> And don't worry about the noise, it's interesting to know that pacman >> doesn't play nicely since 3.3.1 with lighttpd-1.4.23 because of a bug. > > Got that, thanks for your help with this problem. > > By the way, i'll post the repo-delta-clean stuff sometime this week > after i got around to make a final set of tests.
Good work tracking this down, guys. Sorry if I sounded a bit off-putting this morning, I'm just not a fan of bug reports without details and I've been seeing a lot of those lately (mostly at my real job). :) -Dan