Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2013 02:36:01 +0100 From: Michael Gmelin <freebsd@grem.de> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> Cc: marino@freebsd.org, Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: bsd.port.mk FETCH_ARGS defaults, why "-A" ? Message-ID: <20131228023601.45838a0a@bsd64.grem.de> In-Reply-To: <20131228012711.GJ40122@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <52BE1763.8090105@marino.st> <FF64DFE1-6245-4370-8FD1-77300848CF88@FreeBSD.org> <52BE20DD.8060403@marino.st> <20131228005622.GH40122@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20131228020531.468e36f9@bsd64.grem.de> <20131228012711.GJ40122@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 02:27:11 +0100 Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:05:31AM +0100, Michael Gmelin wrote: > > On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 01:56:22 +0100 > > Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 01:52:45AM +0100, John Marino wrote: > > > > On 12/28/2013 01:49, Dimitry Andric wrote: > > > > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 01:12, John Marino > > > > > <freebsd.contact@marino.st> wrote: > > > > >> For months I've been getting a lot of fetch failures in ports > > > > >> that I couldn't reproduce outside of them. It appears it is > > > > >> caused by the default "-A" passed to fetch. > > > > >> > > > > >> For example, /usr/ports/emulators/javatari will fail with > > > > >> "make fetch" but it will succeed with with "make fetch > > > > >> FETCH_ARGS=-Fpr" > > > > >> > > > > >> I'd like to understand why "-A" is the default. Clearly many > > > > >> distfiles could be retrieved that aren't, so I'd like to know > > > > >> what -A is saving us from, and why that would be worse than > > > > >> the current situation? > > > > > > > > > > Crappy download sites that redirect you to ad pages, malware > > > > > domains, or worse? > > > > > > > > > > > > > And? > > > > The checksum won't match, and the next site in the MASTER_SITES > > > > list will be checked, right? What is the downside of this > > > > redirect? Keep in mind that the site was once "approved" by the > > > > port maintainer, it's not some random URL stuck in a wiki. > > > > > > That's to avoid infinite loop on redirection > > > > > > bapt > > > > libfetch allows a maximum um five redirects and the -A flag is > > implemented in terms of limiting this to one: > > > > http.c: > > ... > > /* Maximum number of redirects to follow */ > > #define MAX_REDIRECT 5 > > ... > > /* if the A flag is set, we only get one try */ > > n = noredirect ? 1 : MAX_REDIRECT; > > i = 0; > > ... > > > > Great so that s not an argument anymore, it was the argument I was > told 2 years ago when I proposed to remove the -A > > regards, > Bapt MAX_REDIRECT is 20 now (9.2 / 10) to match the behavior of popular browsers, but other than that it has been unchanged for over a decade (since July 2000 to be precise). -- Michael Gmelin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131228023601.45838a0a>