When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalized web experience. Because we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change our default settings.
However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer. Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies. Statistic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.
IDE - Used by Google DoubleClick to register and report the website user's actions after viewing or clicking one of the advertiser's ads with the purpose of measuring the efficacy of an ad and to present targeted ads to the user. These cookies are used to collect website statistics and track conversion rates. The ID is used for serving ads that are most relevant to the user.
DV - Google ad personalisation. These cookies use an unique identifier to verify if a visitor is human or a bot. Need help? Our experts have had an average response time of We will keep your servers stable, secure, and fast at all times for one fixed price. You can enable this via different methods.
Enabling for a unique website. Then we save the php. Finally, we restart the Apache service using httpd restart 5. The path of the php. Initially, we logged into the server via SSH as root access. After that, we edited the directive in php. Finally, restart the webserver. We signed up to WHM panel.
The issue introduced in Joomla 3. Is a forbidden character for filenames on Windows. We can use JHttp to get the correct response headers, I would think, the JHttpResponse object includes a headers array and it is already internally following redirects.
But that can even be worked around, tell JHttp to not follow redirects and extract the needed info manually. Either way the code that was added is valid, we just need to improve it a bit to use our abstraction layer versus something that creates a hard dependency.
That's an option, but I have to look at the code: if JHttp makes the redirect target availabe in some way, then we can already solve the problem by adjusting the name during the download phase, not where it's done now.
But please read further, I actually don't understand why we need to follow redirects to modify the file name. What I don't understand however is why we have to follow the redirect s to modify the file name? If the original URL has a? Maybe we need to hear from milux and rdeutz to understand better the intent? At this point, my suggestion would simply be to remove entirely that "follow redirects" part, and just sanitize the file name if it has a?
Or we could just base64 encode the URL, use that as a file name, and don't be bothered by the question marks? I see no reason to do that only on the final URL.
The filename compted at this stage is returned and used throughout, so there is no problem modifying it as we see fit. But there might be a reason, so would be great to hear from others Actually I can see now that if the original URL is fixed, something like domain. Meaning we have to always re-download the file, even if it's there.
I would suspect so, but the question is more why should we use the final URL ie possibly invalid because of the? A quick test on JHttp shows that the final target redirect is not available in the object returned.
Otherwise, you need to be careful that parsing a URL and simply taking the last path segment and stripping the query string still gives a valid filename with file extension. And I think our internals when processing packages both the update system and the regular extension library require a valid filename with valid extension to operate correctly so you couldn't just tell it to unpack foo , it has to be foo. I still don't really understand the problem, so it's hard to go any further.
Going to try dig out how this issue with? The downloads site uses Akeeba Release System. How the files are hosted FWIW they're on S3 is really unimportant at this point other than the fact that there is a redirect issued when requesting the file package for obvious reasons.
Even though we use that URL structure, changing the URL structure in the update server doesn't fix the core issue of trying to write to the filesystem based on the last path segment of the URL and including the query string which uses an invalid character for filenames on Windows the question mark. But you see this is what I don't understand so far: in the manifest, we have a perfectly valid URL with a valid file name, without any? So we could use that directly and not bother about following the redirects that you have to do to work with ATS.
I'm still puzzled as to why we need to figure out the final redirect target and use that to derive a file name, while we could just use the original name?? For that to work though, the uploaded filename has to match the offered download filename. So in the update component it's actually a bit more important that the package names match up.
Well yes. If you feel like 7aa5e65 needs to be reverted feel free to propose a PR doing so. But that's the history of why it was needed, and because the release team at the time decided it wasn't urgent enough to push a separate download for the update component to fix the ability for Windows systems to update with the default ARS URLs, I had to hack ARS to work around that decision and keep users on Windows platforms able to do core updates.
Right or wrong the code is there now. I won't do a PR to revert the changes that without a clear view of why it was added, and whether it's safe to remove it. For instance, will we keep using your hack, or find another way, to be sure URls do not have? Not knowing about releases or infrastructure, I'm not confident enough here.
Did you have a look at ? The problem was that the updater tried to create a file containing characters that were illegal on windows platforms, because the query string was included to obtain a "file name" with a ".
In order to fix this and obtain a valid filename with a proper extension, I suggested that fix that resolves the "real" name of the archive by following the redirects. Actually, without following redirects it's imho impossible to find whether the same file has already been downloaded from AWS or whatever source. If there is some abstraction class in Joomla!
I usually look for such options before trying the good old PHP commands, but I might have overlooked something here, so please enlighten me! That would be a HUGE waste of time and resources The updater checks for a new version in the first step anyway, right?
So, couldn't we use a constant file name and remove all redirection follow code and existence check stuff, just downloading a fresh version every time? That would definitely reduce the complexity significantly, and make many also future problems disappear A constant file name is out of the question as that would mean overwriting files at each release for some resource.
You also would have no way of knowing if package. True, that's exactly the problem I was mentioning. But I don't consider it an option to download the file multiple times either, how about you? Is there any chance to know the file name before the download starts and passing it via some parameter? You also discussed that basename would now be reliable again because the presented path changed, right?
How durable is that change? Is just reverting my patch really an option, or will we start over with the issue once again in a couple of months? As Michael explained, this was solved some times ago, and now all download files name are real file names, without any?
Meaning we don't have to worry about? That is a valid question. Can the rule of presenting for download a valid file name be set in stone for future releases? Now if you look at the update manifest file format, it may be possible to also provide a valid file name though:. Is the downloadname tag content actually independent from the downloadurl tag content, or does this data come from the same source?
0コメント