Serendipity Forums

Hi there.
I attempted a fresh install of serendipity but didn't go through with it since a couple of checksums didn't match.
I tried those downloads:
Serendipity 1.5.2 tar.gz
(MD5: 4b8bc7cce9e2b2ba6c0c0e87855e53cc)
Serendipity 1.5.2 tar.bz2
(MD5: 942c48b7aac9cec78e91d273f03738a0)
Serendipity 1.5.2 ZIP
(MD5: 467ea62f7d52d46e3edc7c6d9cfd8d8f)

The md5sums checked out after download, I unpacked those (tar, unzip) and uploaded using two different ftp clients (filezilla, gftp) and when I called the site the pre-install thing always said that some checksums don't match.

Verify Installation Integrity
lang/UTF-8/recode.sh corrupt or modified: failed verification [?]
lang/append.sh corrupt or modified: failed verification [?]
lang/addlang.sh corrupt or modified: failed verification [?]
docs/upgrade.sh corrupt or modified: failed verification [?]
bundled-libs/Smarty/COPYING.lib corrupt or modified: failed verification [?]
bundled-libs/create_release.sh corrupt or modified: failed verification [?]

Serendipity 1.5.2 LITE tar.gz
(MD5: 261d3ad9b2e2446cffdec8b2d2bdf34f)

In this one the checksum file checksums.inc.php is simply missing...

I'm new to web apps but I'd expect checksums to match when they're there...
Also bug trackers are considered good practice these days.

Hi!

How did you upload the files? It seems your FTP client might have used ASCII transfer for .sh and .lib files. If you ensure that the transfer is done with BINARY transfer, all should be well.

However, those files are non-essential, so you can also feel free to delete them, or ignore them. The lite release does indeed omit the checksum file for size reasons, and because we would need a second release process to build a checksum file for the "lite" release, which we didn't think necessary.

Also bug trackers are considered good practice these days.

Sure, which is why we have one on the SF.Net project page, as advertised on http://www.s9y.org/114.html

Regards,
Garvin

garvinhicking wrote:Hi!

How did you upload the files? It seems your FTP client might have used ASCII transfer for .sh and .lib files. If you ensure that the transfer is done with BINARY transfer, all should be well.

gftp was set to binary mode for sure, filezilla was set to 'auto' so I don't know what it used. The result was the same with both clients.

garvinhicking wrote: However, those files are non-essential, so you can also feel free to delete them, or ignore them. The lite release does indeed omit the checksum file for size reasons, and because we would need a second release process to build a checksum file for the "lite" release, which we didn't think necessary.

Well, I'd rather be sure the files are all fine. I don't want to file reports for strange non-bugs.

garvinhicking wrote:

Also bug trackers are considered good practice these days.

Sure, which is why we have one on the SF.Net project page, as advertised on http://www.s9y.org/114.html :-)

Regards,
Garvin

Ah, ok. The forum is just far easier to find and has a bug section as well, so I assumed there was no tracker.

Hi!

The checksums of the files are tried to be calculated in a way that removes \r and \n linebreaks from the files, but in certain occasions depending on the host and client OS'es/software, the files can be mangled with additional linefeeds or extra-characters that screw with the hashing.

The .sh files are never called by s9y itself, they're more like for developers or contributors or specific usage scenarios that involve the bash, but I understand if you want to not skip on an issue.

Ah, ok. The forum is just far easier to find and has a bug section as well, so I assumed there was no tracker.

Yes, the forum's also perfectly fine, the discussion here is much more open, while the bug tracker has quite limited feedback due to less people checking it. Personally, I do prefer the forums and I keep bookmarks of important things that cannot be instantly fixed, or port them over to the bugtracker.

Regards,
Garvin

garvinhicking wrote:Hi!

The checksums of the files are tried to be calculated in a way that removes \r and \n linebreaks from the files, but in certain occasions depending on the host and client OS'es/software, the files can be mangled with additional linefeeds or extra-characters that screw with the hashing.

The .sh files are never called by s9y itself, they're more like for developers or contributors or specific usage scenarios that involve the bash, but I understand if you want to not skip on an issue. :)

Both OS'es are linux.. two different ftp clients.. I wonder what the culprit is..
I guess it's ok if s9y never calls those files, so I'll still try s9y once the hosting service is up and running again.

garvinhicking wrote:

Ah, ok. The forum is just far easier to find and has a bug section as well, so I assumed there was no tracker.

Yes, the forum's also perfectly fine, the discussion here is much more open, while the bug tracker has quite limited feedback due to less people checking it. Personally, I do prefer the forums and I keep bookmarks of important things that cannot be instantly fixed, or port them over to the bugtracker.

Regards,
Garvin

Yes, there seems to be no perfect bugtracker around.. I kind of like the kernel.org one tough.
I'm not a bug fan of fora, stuff gets lost easily, it's very chaotic, but if it works for you..

Thanks a lot for your help Garvin.
Regards,
Philipp

Hi!

If you maybe have SSH access to the target server, you could try to extract the archive through a "wget ... tar -xvzf" chain and then make a "diff" of the resulting .sh files and the ones you manually FTPed over, just to see what the difference could be?

I personally only use FileZilla and have no experience with gftp; but there were certain FTP tools that even adjusted linebreaks at the end of ASCII files to ensure a "trailing linefeed"; maybe something similar happens here...

Yes, there seems to be no perfect bugtracker around.. I kind of like the kernel.org one tough.
I'm not a bug fan of fora, stuff gets lost easily, it's very chaotic, but if it works for you..

Luckily this is an advantage of a smaller blog system, it allows us to pay much more attention on similar issues/reports and the individual usage scenarios. So as long as that works here, I'm quite okay with it.

If you face any more issues, feel free to post

Regards,
Garvin

garvinhicking wrote:Hi!

If you maybe have SSH access to the target server, you could try to extract the archive through a "wget ... tar -xvzf" chain and then make a "diff" of the resulting .sh files and the ones you manually FTPed over, just to see what the difference could be?

Sadly I don't have ssh access. There's webdav (if I could get it to work) and some web thingy.
It's not an optimal hosting solution but it's free and add free, which is fine for a little blog.

I doubt extraction itself is the issue since it was the same with unzip and tar xf.

garvinhicking wrote:I personally only use FileZilla and have no experience with gftp; but there were certain FTP tools that even adjusted linebreaks at the end of ASCII files to ensure a "trailing linefeed"; maybe something similar happens here...

Next time I'll try filezilla and set it to binary explicitly.

garvinhicking wrote:

Yes, there seems to be no perfect bugtracker around.. I kind of like the kernel.org one tough.
I'm not a bug fan of fora, stuff gets lost easily, it's very chaotic, but if it works for you..

Luckily this is an advantage of a smaller blog system, it allows us to pay much more attention on similar issues/reports and the individual usage scenarios. So as long as that works here, I'm quite okay with it.

If you face any more issues, feel free to post :)

Regards,
Garvin

It's apparently not that well known, but according to the reviews it's fantastic.
I could only try it on a very limited installation so far, but it seemed easy enough to use. I have yet to figure out whether it can provide feeds per category/tag so I could send only posts with a certain tag to a certain planet. But I think I'll use it even if it can't do that.

Regards,
Philipp

EDIT: Actually the info was easy to find :)
http://www.s9y.org/49.html#A4

Hi!

It's apparently not that well known, but according to the reviews it's fantastic.
I could only try it on a very limited installation so far, but it seemed easy enough to use. I have yet to figure out whether it can provide feeds per category/tag so I could send only posts with a certain tag to a certain planet. But I think I'll use it even if it can't do that.

Yes, feeds per category/tag are possible. Feed URLs for Categories can be seen when you activate the "Categories" sidebar plugin and enable the option to show RSS feeds. For Tags, you can install and active the Tagging-Plugin for Serendipity which also has a sidebar plugin that allows you to show RSS-Feeds per tag.

(And yes, the proper commands are listed in the URL you found, good you noted that too because I already forgot about it )

Best regards,
Garvin

garvinhicking wrote:Hi!

It's apparently not that well known, but according to the reviews it's fantastic.
I could only try it on a very limited installation so far, but it seemed easy enough to use. I have yet to figure out whether it can provide feeds per category/tag so I could send only posts with a certain tag to a certain planet. But I think I'll use it even if it can't do that.

Yes, feeds per category/tag are possible. Feed URLs for Categories can be seen when you activate the "Categories" sidebar plugin and enable the option to show RSS feeds. For Tags, you can install and active the Tagging-Plugin for Serendipity which also has a sidebar plugin that allows you to show RSS-Feeds per tag. :)

(And yes, the proper commands are listed in the URL you found, good you noted that too because I already forgot about it :) )

Best regards,
Garvin

Very good, thanks.

It seems I can do what I want, those files get corrupted.
However, this time I went through with the setup and it was really easy.

But.. the hosting service operates php in safe mode and some other stuff, so spartacus doesn't work, which is quite an inconvenience. Guess I should keep looking for another hosting service.

Hi!

In a SafeMode envirnoment you might want to try the Spartacus FTP mode, so that Spartacus tries t connect via PHP instead locally. However that requires the FTP extension of PHP to be enabled...

HTH,.
Garvin

garvinhicking wrote:Hi!

In a SafeMode envirnoment you might want to try the Spartacus FTP mode, so that Spartacus tries t connect via PHP instead locally. However that requires the FTP extension of PHP to be enabled...

HTH,.
Garvin

I tried but I got:
Warning: ini_set() has been disabled for security reasons in ...
and:
Warning: curl_exec() has been disabled for security reasons in ...
and:
cURL library returned a failure, too.
and:
SPARTACUS attempted to connect to Google and failed (error 0: ).
Your server is blocking outgoing connections. ...

So I guess I have no chance with this hosting service.

I noticed that the default plugins don't show up in the spartacus repository, do they only get updated with s9y releases?

murks wrote:I noticed that the default plugins don't show up in the spartacus repository, do they only get updated with s9y releases?

Yes - only updated with a core update/release.

Hi!

Yeah, they pretty much locked out Spartacus, so you would need to upload plugins manually.

Internal plugins that get shipped with s9y releases are not part of Spartacus, that's true. Often they depend on internal relations so we never "outsourced" them.

Regards,
Garvin