Re: behaviour change in download.kde.org - was - Re: KDE Frameworks 5.36.0

[Ben Cooksley]

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:19 PM, Harald Sitter  wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:05 PM, David Faure  wrote:
>> On mardi 11 juillet 2017 11:52:19 CEST Harald Sitter wrote:
>>> Seems most likely the directory wasn't actually 750.
>>
>> I always create it with
>>   mkdir $dest
>>   chmod o-rx $dest
>>
>> which, on racnoss.kde.org, leads to
>> drwxr-x--- 2 ftpadmin packager   2 Jul 11 10:04 testdir
>
> So it is 750 after all. That does seem odd then.
> I've just tried with the neon archive user on racnoss to eliminate
> apache as a possible cause. When marking a dir 750 in the neon archive
> it is not indexed, adding +x it gets indexed as expected.
>
> https://origin.archive.neon.kde.org/.test/
>
> This dir has
>
> drwxr-x--- 2 neonarchives neonarchives  2 Jul 11 10:15 750/
> drwxr-x--x 2 neonarchives neonarchives  2 Jul 11 10:15 751/
>
> Something must be astray with the setup of the download.kde.org vhost :S

It is slightly different, in so far that the following directives are
passed to Apache:

DirectoryIndex disabled
IndexOptions HTMLTable SuppressColumnsorting SuppressHTMLPreamble
FancyIndexing XHTML NameWidth=80 FoldersFirst SuppressDescription
Metalink MirrorList VersionSort

My guess would be some of these may be the cause, even though they
shouldn't make a difference.

>
> HS

Regards,
Ben

Re: behaviour change in download.kde.org - was - Re: KDE Frameworks 5.36.0

[Harald Sitter]

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:05 PM, David Faure  wrote:
> On mardi 11 juillet 2017 11:52:19 CEST Harald Sitter wrote:
>> Seems most likely the directory wasn't actually 750.
>
> I always create it with
>   mkdir $dest
>   chmod o-rx $dest
>
> which, on racnoss.kde.org, leads to
> drwxr-x--- 2 ftpadmin packager   2 Jul 11 10:04 testdir

So it is 750 after all. That does seem odd then.
I've just tried with the neon archive user on racnoss to eliminate
apache as a possible cause. When marking a dir 750 in the neon archive
it is not indexed, adding +x it gets indexed as expected.

https://origin.archive.neon.kde.org/.test/

This dir has

drwxr-x--- 2 neonarchives neonarchives  2 Jul 11 10:15 750/
drwxr-x--x 2 neonarchives neonarchives  2 Jul 11 10:15 751/

Something must be astray with the setup of the download.kde.org vhost :S

HS

Re: behaviour change in download.kde.org - was - Re: KDE Frameworks 5.36.0

[David Faure]

On mardi 11 juillet 2017 11:52:19 CEST Harald Sitter wrote:
> Seems most likely the directory wasn't actually 750.

I always create it with
  mkdir $dest
  chmod o-rx $dest

which, on racnoss.kde.org, leads to
drwxr-x--- 2 ftpadmin packager   2 Jul 11 10:04 testdir

-- 
David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr
Working on KDE Frameworks 5

Re: behaviour change in download.kde.org - was - Re: KDE Frameworks 5.36.0

[Ben Cooksley]

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:14 PM, Maximiliano Curia
 wrote:
> ¡Hola Ben!

Hi Maximiliano,

>
> El 2017-07-11 a las 20:10 +1200, Ben Cooksley escribió:
>>
>> Not to my knowledge - the last change to the system was back in February
>> this year. I've done some searching and Apache doesn't appear to support not
>> including an inaccessible directory in a listing of files.
>
>
> If the change was introduced in february that would explain why I haven't
> noticed so far. While Debian was on deep freeze I stopped checking for new
> upstream releases, and restarted checking them now.

Okay. My guess would be that something deep within Apache has changed
behaviour wise unless something else was amiss.

Configuration wise the machines are essentially identical (the change
in February was a major system upgrade and physical host change) the
only change was a major jump in versions.

>
> Happy hacking,
> --
> "If a pickpocket meets a saint, he sees only his pockets."
> -- Kegley's Law
> Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/

Regards,
Ben

Re: behaviour change in download.kde.org - was - Re: KDE Frameworks 5.36.0

[Harald Sitter]

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:17 PM, Albert Astals Cid  wrote:
> El dilluns, 10 de juliol de 2017, a les 11:32:41 CEST, David Faure va
> escriure:
>> On vendredi 7 juillet 2017 15:51:41 CEST Maximiliano Curia wrote:
>> > ¡Hola David!
>> >
>> > El 2017-07-03 a las 02:18 +0200, David Faure escribió:
>> > > KDE Frameworks 5.36.0 has been uploaded to the usual place.
>> > >
>> > > New frameworks: none this time.
>> > >
>> > > Public release next Saturday.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks for the packaging work!
>> >
>> > Currently, 5.36 is listed in https://download.kde.org/stable/frameworks/
>> > but it gives 403 to try to access it. This is a bit of an annoyance for
>> > some of my scripts.
>> >
>> > If possible, could you please add the folder only when it's published?
>>
>> That folder is where the packagers get the tarballs from (using scp, not
>> public http), so I don't see how to do that.
>>
>> It's always been that way : for one week, the folder is there but without
>> permissions for the whole world just yet.
>>
>> (always = not just for KF5, but also for KDE SC releases, as far back as I
>> can remember)
>
> I'm 94.29% sure that previously stuff that was chmod 750 and belonging to
> ftpadmin:packager did not show in the http listing.

Seems most likely the directory wasn't actually 750.

Apache entirely holds on to view permission rather than read permission.

drwxr-x---  2 rootroot4096 Jul 11 09:33 750/
drwxr-x--x  2 rootroot4096 Jul 11 09:33 751/
drwxr-x-w-  2 rootroot4096 Jul 11 09:34 752/
drwxr-x-wx  2 rootroot4096 Jul 11 09:34 753/
drwxr-xr--  2 rootroot4096 Jul 11 09:34 754/
drwxr-xr-x  2 rootroot4096 Jul 11 09:34 755/

Being index by apache thusly

751/2017-07-11 09:33-
753/2017-07-11 09:34-
755/2017-07-11 09:34-

So, apache ignores all directories which aren't +x for apache's user.
Directories which are +x are listed but not necessarily readable (e.g.
751 results in HTTP 403 Forbidden).

TLDR: if the dir is -x it won't show up in the index, if it is +x it will.

HS

Re: behaviour change in download.kde.org - was - Re: KDE Frameworks 5.36.0

[Maximiliano Curia]

¡Hola Ben!

El 2017-07-11 a las 20:10 +1200, Ben Cooksley escribió:
Not to my knowledge - the last change to the system was back in 
February this year. 
I've done some searching and Apache doesn't appear to support not 
including an inaccessible directory in a listing of files.


If the change was introduced in february that would explain why I haven't 
noticed so far. While Debian was on deep freeze I stopped checking for new 
upstream releases, and restarted checking them now.


Happy hacking,
--
"If a pickpocket meets a saint, he sees only his pockets."
-- Kegley's Law
Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: behaviour change in download.kde.org - was - Re: KDE Frameworks 5.36.0

[Ben Cooksley]

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Albert Astals Cid  wrote:
> El dilluns, 10 de juliol de 2017, a les 11:32:41 CEST, David Faure va
> escriure:
>> On vendredi 7 juillet 2017 15:51:41 CEST Maximiliano Curia wrote:
>> > ¡Hola David!
>> >
>> > El 2017-07-03 a las 02:18 +0200, David Faure escribió:
>> > > KDE Frameworks 5.36.0 has been uploaded to the usual place.
>> > >
>> > > New frameworks: none this time.
>> > >
>> > > Public release next Saturday.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks for the packaging work!
>> >
>> > Currently, 5.36 is listed in https://download.kde.org/stable/frameworks/
>> > but it gives 403 to try to access it. This is a bit of an annoyance for
>> > some of my scripts.
>> >
>> > If possible, could you please add the folder only when it's published?
>>
>> That folder is where the packagers get the tarballs from (using scp, not
>> public http), so I don't see how to do that.
>>
>> It's always been that way : for one week, the folder is there but without
>> permissions for the whole world just yet.
>>
>> (always = not just for KF5, but also for KDE SC releases, as far back as I
>> can remember)
>

Hi Albert,

> I'm 94.29% sure that previously stuff that was chmod 750 and belonging to
> ftpadmin:packager did not show in the http listing.
>
> sysadmins has there been an update to the code serving the download.kde.org
> listings?

Not to my knowledge - the last change to the system was back in
February this year.
I've done some searching and Apache doesn't appear to support not
including an inaccessible directory in a listing of files.

>
> Cheers,
>   Albert

Cheers,
Ben