MDMF filecaps should tolerate extra parameters #1509

Closed
opened 2011-08-27 18:01:28 +00:00 by warner · 2 comments
warner commented 2011-08-27 18:01:28 +00:00
Owner

The MDMF filecap format is currently defined as:

  URI:MDMF:$writekey:$fingerprint[(:$extension)*]

and all existing caps are created with two extension fields: the first is 'k' (as an integer), the second is segsize (also as an integer). The intention is to allow additional extension fields to be added in the future, perhaps hints that could speed up a download.

But I think I saw places in the code that fail if the number of extension fields is not either 0 or 2. These places should be fixed to tolerate 1, or 3, etc.

I'd like to have this in 1.9 because then 1.9 will be tolerant of caps generated by future versions that have a different number of extension fields.

The MDMF filecap format is currently defined as: ``` URI:MDMF:$writekey:$fingerprint[(:$extension)*] ``` and all existing caps are created with two extension fields: the first is 'k' (as an integer), the second is segsize (also as an integer). The intention is to allow additional extension fields to be added in the future, perhaps hints that could speed up a download. But I think I saw places in the code that fail if the number of extension fields is not either 0 or 2. These places should be fixed to tolerate 1, or 3, etc. I'd like to have this in 1.9 because then 1.9 will be tolerant of caps generated by future versions that have a different number of extension fields.
tahoe-lafs added the
code-mutable
minor
defect
1.9.0a1
labels 2011-08-27 18:01:28 +00:00
tahoe-lafs added this to the 1.9.0 milestone 2011-08-27 18:01:28 +00:00
davidsarah commented 2011-08-28 03:40:35 +00:00
Author
Owner

+1 on fixing this for 1.9.

+1 on fixing this for 1.9.
tahoe-lafs added
major
and removed
minor
labels 2011-08-28 03:40:35 +00:00
davidsarah commented 2011-09-04 21:52:07 +00:00
Author
Owner

Duplicate of #1526. Will copy the description there.

Duplicate of #1526. Will copy the description there.
tahoe-lafs added the
duplicate
label 2011-09-04 21:52:07 +00:00
davidsarah closed this issue 2011-09-04 21:52:07 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25#1509
No description provided.