[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 16:50:01 +0100 (CET)
From: "Jens Schleusener" <Jens.Schleusener@...nline.de>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: "musl" gzip-compressed tarballs are decompressed if using
newest wegt release
On Wed, 1 Nov 2017, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 11:19:30AM +0100, Jens Schleusener wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> not a real "musl" software problem but just an observation of a
>> changed behaviour of "musl" tarball downloads with the newest "wegt"
>> release (1.19.2): The tarballs are saved now decompressed but
>> contains the original extension (.tar.gz). Although if the extension
>> would be .tar it seems at least to me an undesired behaviour.
>>
>> Reason seems a new "wget" feature, here some extracted lines taken
>> from the ChangeLog
>>
>> 2017-08-04
>> Add gzip Content-Encoding decompression
>> (gethttp): Decompress files with gzip Content-Encoding
>>
>> in combination with the HTTP header the www.musl-libc.org server delivers:
>>
>> Content-Type: application/x-tar
>> Content-Encoding: gzip
>>
>> Solutions/workarounds may be on the server side delivering of a HTTP
>> header like
>>
>> Content-Type: application/x-gzip
>> (or Content-Type: application/octet-stream)
>>
>> or on the client side the use of the new "wget" option
>>
>> --compression=none
>
> IMO this is both a bug in the server and a major regression in wget,
> since lots of servers have this bug. I'll look at fixing it on my side
> but I think it should be reported to wget and reverted since this is
> going to break a *huge* number of build scripts that download tarballs
> from affected servers.
Thanks for the more clear statement (I agree). If not already done by
another person I will send an accoding mail to the "bug-wget" list.
Jens
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
