rejetto forum

Software => HFS ~ HTTP File Server => Beta => Topic started by: rejetto on September 14, 2010, 07:19:21 PM

Title: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on September 14, 2010, 07:19:21 PM
this build required some heavy change, so i decided to not include it (for now) in the automated updates.
The faints of heart won't be involved in this testing.
Supper is ready!

Quote from: mars
not download @ www.dovedove.it/hfs/hfs270.exe but this new build @ http://hfs.webhop.org/hfs270a.exe

this first link has a bug (see post http://www.rejetto.com/forum/index.php/topic,9113.msg1052156.html#msg1052156)

what's new
+ new "move" feature, requires delete and upload permission
+ new scripting alias: redirect [link] (http://www.rejetto.com/forum/index.php/topic,9105.msg1052112.html#msg1052112)
+ new scripting commands: vfs to disk, break
+ redirection now works on template, not only events [link] (http://www.rejetto.com/forum/index.php/topic,9105.msg1052112.html#msg1052112)
+ {.get|can upload|path=XXX.}
+ {.get|can access|path=XXX.}
- "update automatically" broken in build #265 [link] (http://www.rejetto.com/forum/index.php/topic,9093.msg1051986.html#msg1051986)
- better recognition of UTF-8 templates
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: TEA-Time on September 15, 2010, 01:23:41 AM
I hope rejetto can add a little smarts to the process of figuring out whether or not to show that option by looking at what users are in the assigned groups.

in next release (270).

Looks good!  It even figures out groups in groups. :-)

Thanks!
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on September 15, 2010, 09:28:20 AM
yeah, i forgot to include it in the change-log
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: r][m on September 15, 2010, 03:11:25 PM
Right click on folder at root level protected with "Any account" or
"Everyone" gives error here.
Folder protected with group or individual permissions do not give error.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on September 15, 2010, 05:50:32 PM
Right click on folder at root level protected with "Any account" or
"Everyone" gives error here.
Folder protected with group or individual permissions do not give error.

Exact... I confirm.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: Mars on September 15, 2010, 07:09:48 PM
Quote
Right click on folder at root level protected with "Any account" or
"Everyone" gives error here.
Folder protected with group or individual permissions do not give error.

Right click on ANY folder protected  with "Any account" or "Everyone" gives error here.

select another item of the vfs by using CTRL, with two items selected and Right click on folder at root level protected with "Any account" or "Everyone" gives  NO ERROR   ;) (c'est déjà une piste) then it's possible to uncheck "Any account" and
"Everyone" for those items

Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: Mars on September 15, 2010, 09:13:51 PM
Be happy my followers, the bug is begged. I put a temporary link on a corrected version, until the release of new build 271 ;)

http://hfs.webhop.org/hfs270a.exe

@rejetto
Quote
function expandAccountByLink(a:Paccount; noGroups:boolean=TRUE):TstringDynArray;
var
  i: integer;
begin
result:=NIL;
==>>// next line is necessary because getAccount(users, TRUE) seems sometime return NIL into the function expandAccountsByLink, then a.group give the bug
if not assigned(a) then exit;
if not (a.group and noGroups) then
  addString(a.user, result);
for i:=0 to length(accounts)-1 do
  if stringExists(a.user, accounts.link) then
    addArray(result, expandAccountByLink(@accounts));
end; // expandAccountByLink

Now, I deserved to go to sleep me  :D
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on September 17, 2010, 02:46:43 PM
Hi all!  :)

@Mars
Thanks for the fix!  ;)

@rejetto
It would be nice if you add a group to allow access to the function "move". (as for the change password)
In fact, I think that admins that allow to upload and delete at user, do not necessarily want to allow him to move items.

Request optional: :)

On releases in French, I named groups in this way:

#administration#, #create-folders#, #comments#, #password#, #move#...

I know it's a way to appoint a bit arbitrary, but it has the advantage of making easier the ranking of the list of User Accounts.
If you could do something like that, it would help me ... but that is certainly not a requirement. ;)
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on September 19, 2010, 05:33:56 PM
if you have delete and upload, then you can delete then upload.
giving the "move" button just avoids a waste of time and resources, is not giving you more power, so what's the point in not giving the button?

consider the upload permission is not checked over the source folder, but the destination folder.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on September 19, 2010, 05:49:30 PM
One example among other possible.

If I give permissions to upload and delete at several people on several folders & subfolders (containing resources of a different type)... it can quickly become a joyful huge mess if all users begin to move resources. It's better in this case to limit this option ... which I think is different in facts of the simple upload and delete feature.

Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on September 19, 2010, 06:44:44 PM
do you think that the "move" button will induce people to be wild more than the "delete" button?
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on September 19, 2010, 07:09:06 PM
 :D

Maybe, who knows!  :P

No, simply, the administrator may wish that the resources remain at a specific location or even are deleted ... but he don't want which are dispatched in a uncontrolled manner into the VFS.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: TSG on September 21, 2010, 06:28:43 AM
This build works good with Live 3.0.1 and special characters :) thanks for fixing that rejetto.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: dragon_ex on September 21, 2010, 08:47:49 AM
In #269 ,HFS service will  stop response  when a huge file ,for example 3GB, is downloading. Has this problem been fixed in #270?


By the way, how can I make my national flag shown below my nickname “dragon_ex”? :)
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: Mars on September 21, 2010, 05:42:47 PM
@Chthonic    posts about sockets and keyboard have been moved to
http://www.rejetto.com/forum/index.php/topic,9138.msg1052264.html#msg1052264
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on September 23, 2010, 10:30:16 AM
No, simply, the administrator may wish that the resources remain at a specific location or even are deleted ... but he don't want which are dispatched in a uncontrolled manner into the VFS.

you "don't want" but the user can do it anyway, uncontrolled, just slower.
You are replying but ignoring what i said. You may even be right, but that's how a debate should go on. :P
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on September 23, 2010, 10:33:46 AM
In #269 ,HFS service will  stop response  when a huge file ,for example 3GB, is downloading. Has this problem been fixed in #270?

please run #267 and see if the problem disappear.

Quote
By the way, how can I make my national flag shown below my nickname “dragon_ex”? :)

click profile
forum profile information
please select your country
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on September 24, 2010, 02:34:01 AM
you "don't want" but the user can do it anyway, uncontrolled, just slower.
You are replying but ignoring what i said. You may even be right, but that's how a debate should go on. :P

I thought I had responded to your point of view indirectly, through examples, which showed, in my opinion, the potentially bad side effects for the move button in access to all users with permissions to upload and delete.
I know that the user can do it anyway ... but there are cases where, if I can avoid to facilitate his task.

My idea of a group, to my mind, would have allowed to choose more precisely who can do what.
I feel as the only one to see things from that angle ... thus, it was probably a bad idea.
I will try, next time, to be more direct and precise, so that you no longer you felt alone anymore for debate.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: r][m on September 24, 2010, 05:26:01 AM
Is there a way to implement "move" as part of admin panel, without using ajax?
 
I think it might be useful in that way, but it's not something I'd grant to over 2 users, me being one.
(for that matter, I allow very few to delete)
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on September 27, 2010, 06:54:57 PM
@r][m
sure it's possible. It's just not a quick work.

@sp
i want to clarify, not just for you. :)
If i debate i don't necessarily disagree with you 100%. I had already considered your suggestion from a superficial description, now we are going in details to see if we find any flaw in one of our point of views.
I sometimes do this even in case i agree with you, just to see if both of us are wrong. :D Not joking it's an important step in designing, considering alternatives. And necessary on any security matter.
It's just apparently a competitive process. Being the goal not "to win" for one of us, but to find (eventually) the best solution (both of us). It's actually cooperation.
This said...
you think a user whom you gave delete and upload permissions may be corrupted (morally) by the "move" button, or just it may tempt him at resorting things at his own taste?
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: a_rat on September 28, 2010, 09:33:02 AM
Hi everyone,

Just dropped out of the blue to add my 3 cent piece  :)

I for one would like control over who does what on my server.
My Hardware - My Electricity - My data allowance - MY SAY.
Even if they CAN move stuff any way (a thing i ask you would stop - no i don't know what i ask when i say that)  But just because they COULD, don't mean i want to ENCOURAGE, or make it easy.

To some - i would give delete permission to - but that does not mean i want them messing everything up. they can submit, some have the right to delete. but when a heap of people start to organize things, it's just a pain in the arse. Pardon my Klingon.
I would rather no one could move, change password, or breathe without MY ultimate say so - If its THAT important to them, they can always get their OWN copy of HFS  ;D
(does this amount to a feature request?)

Great work everyone. Keep it up :D - p2p will end up being synonymous with HFS

Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on September 28, 2010, 06:13:44 PM

Being the goal not "to win" for one of us, but to find (eventually) the best solution (both of us). It's actually cooperation.

That's how I see it also. I never liked wrestling. ;)

...
you think a user whom you gave delete and upload permissions may be corrupted (morally) by the "move" button, or just it may tempt him at resorting things at his own taste?

No, I let the corruption -moral or otherwise-, to politicians and other crooks.  :P
It's just problematic when into the VFS, some folders are shared among multiple users, with for all, permissions for upload and delete (and thereby the permission to move items) on these folders... when one or two selected users are allowed to move items, the administrator can follow the story ... if all can do it ... that's an another story!
But there's the same dilemma, some extent, with the "comment" feature ... is this the last user who writes a comment that made the best comment?  ???
That is why treating certain options as "particular options" (via the use of groups), seems more practical than treat them as unavoidable subfeature of, upload, delete, etc. ...

Edit:
I sought for broaden the debate :), if I could find drawbacks with my suggestion, and I found two that we can evaluate as minor or major, depending of points of view:

1 - This will require additional settings to administrators (for include users in the choosed group)
2 - Use a template that includes this group for benefit from the new way to handle this function
     (the "old way" still remains valid with the "old" template)

The fact that we are talking about beta versions, relativize, in my opinion, the "concern" to the second point ... Indeed, changes in templates seem more normal and natural when we refer to these versions.

As for usage security, I think this adds more security rather than to diminish it.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: Ufo36 on October 04, 2010, 04:43:50 PM
I only habe 2 accounts on the Server right now. Both have full permissions für Access, Upload and Delete. But when i want to move a file, i get "Forbidden" Message.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on October 04, 2010, 04:57:23 PM
The destination folder must have same permissions for these user accounts.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: Ufo36 on October 04, 2010, 05:06:44 PM
This 2 Users have this Permissions for all Folders.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on October 04, 2010, 05:22:28 PM
Folders are reals?

Eg:

For move  /folder/my_file.xxx to /folder2/

In the folder named folder, you select  my_file.xxx and enter in the field /folder2

Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: Ufo36 on October 04, 2010, 05:29:59 PM
Yes, folders are Real.

I have a file myfile.xxx in Folder Downloads and want to Move it die Folder Uploads. I mark that File, press the Move Button and in that Window i type /Uploads.
Tried it with Slash and without. Everytime got Forbidden. All Folders are in external Drive D.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on October 04, 2010, 05:36:43 PM
Can you try to test on a internal partition ... to see if that would not be the cause of problem.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: Ufo36 on October 04, 2010, 05:43:14 PM
Now i tried to move a file from the external HD to the internal HD and it works. So i suppose, that there is a Problem because the external HD ist FAT32. I' ll convert it tomorrow and will try again.
Thanks so far.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on October 04, 2010, 08:00:34 PM
I doubt that it is caused to the format in FAT32 ... I just did a test on a USB key formated in FAT32 (in addition on a partition encrypted with Truecrypt). That worked fine.
I don't know what can cause this concern.
Tell us when even if reformatting fixes this bug.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: Ufo36 on October 05, 2010, 03:03:32 PM
First i converted the Drive to NTFS. Now Uploading works much faster than before. Moving works fine too, but i always have to use whole Path for example /D:/MP3, even when all Folders are on D. But this doesn't bother me at all. Maybe my problems occured, because i added the whole drive to HFS and thought, that the Permissions are guilty for all Subfolders.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on October 09, 2010, 03:35:22 PM
some ufo36 posts moved to
http://www.rejetto.com/forum/index.php/board,33.0.html
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on October 09, 2010, 03:44:15 PM
@ufo36
if the file is very big, fat32 cannot hold it, and even moving it with a file manager (like windows explorer) would fail.
if it works now with your ntfs, i guess that was the problem.

Moving works fine too, but i always have to use whole Path for example /D:/MP3, even when all Folders are on D.

you mean you are typing the whole path when you are asked for the destination folder?
i think relative paths should work too, but if the folder is outside this one, and not just a subfolder, then you have to start by ../
in your case this may not be actually a saving.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on October 09, 2010, 06:34:14 PM
1 - This will require additional settings to administrators (for include users in the choosed group)

i assumed it was clear, but that's the true reason why i'm not totally agreeing with this suggestion: usability.
what i really want is not to give not the possibility to decide for this permission, but to get a default behaviour that will fit most people.
as a first step, i'm adding a call to {.can move.} that's just 1 (always true).
people can easily expand by
[+special:strings]
can move=member of|can move

i may change my mind for next build and include the group.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: SilentPliz on October 09, 2010, 07:08:42 PM
This seems a good compromise. This leaves the choice to the administrator.

Thanks! ;)

edit:
About the "move" feature, if you could make to move with the selected file.xxx, files "file.md5" and "file.comment" associates, if they exist... it would be nice.
Title: Re: Testing build #270
Post by: rejetto on October 10, 2010, 10:20:40 PM
right