<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "http://bugs.gentoo.org/bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="2.22.7"
          urlbase="http://bugs.gentoo.org/"
          maintainer="bugzilla@gentoo.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>133500</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2006-05-16 08:38 0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>Rails 1.1.2 needs =&gt; lighttpd 1.4.10</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2006-10-02 22:47:01 0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>Gentoo Linux</product>
          <component>Applications</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>All</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Linux</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>FIXED</resolution>
          
          
          
          <priority>P4</priority>
          <bug_severity>minor</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          <dependson>123022</dependson>
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter>graaff@gentoo.org</reporter>
          <assigned_to>ruby@gentoo.org</assigned_to>
          <cc>bangert@gentoo.org</cc>

      

      
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>graaff@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-05-16 08:38:31 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>The use of lighttpd in Rails 1.1.2 is optional, but it is the default setup for the internal server script in script/server. The lighttpd config file that Rails copies into a new Rails setup contains features (in particular CWD) which older lighttpd versions don&apos;t understand. This leads to an error which gives no indication that a newer version of lighttpd is needed. Upgrading to lighttpd 1.4.10-r2 works fine.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>bangert@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-05-30 13:02:50 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>1.4.11 has been asked to be marked stable</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>jmjmak@utu.fi</who>
            <bug_when>2006-09-30 03:00:52 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>(In reply to comment #1)
&gt; 1.4.11 has been asked to be marked stable

1.4.11 has been marked stable (x86, amd64, ppc64, sparc) for a while now. Can we close this?</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>graaff@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-09-30 03:05:32 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>The fact that lighttpd has been marked stable does not fix the bug, it just makes it less likely that people run into it.

I guess the right way to fix it is to add a lighttpd USE flag to the rails ebuild and depend on &gt;=lighttpd-0.4.10 in this case.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>bangert@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-09-30 03:37:28 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>perhaps adding something like

if has_version www-servers/lighttpd &amp;&amp; has_version &lt;=www-servers/lighttpd-1.4.10
   ewarn &quot;you need at least www-servers/lighttpd-1.4.10 if you want&quot;
   ewarn &quot;to use lighttpd with rails!&quot;
fi

in pkg_setup and/or pkg_config
would suffice. the ebuild should possibly even die at that point... i don&apos;t know of a reason why one would like to stick to a version below 1.4.10...

the big problem of course is, if you have rails and lighttpd installed you have to have lighttpd-1.4.10 or higher... there is nothing to choose. AFAICT this can&apos;t currently be modeled within an ebuild - so its just a matter of which hack we choose...

the last alternative would be to fix the rails server script to, depending on a use flag, use either webrick or lighttpd...

tough call</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>pclouds@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-09-30 12:28:55 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>I&apos;d rather hack commands/server.rb to ignore lighttpd older than 1.4.10 (along with a warning maybe). However patching a gem is not very fun.
Anyway, upstream should know about this and should fix this. They&apos;ve already used `lighttpd -version` to check for lighttpd&apos;s existence. With a proper regexp, they can determine if the installed lighttpd can be used.
Hans, did you inform upstream?</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>graaff@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-10-01 01:49:16 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>No, I did not inform upstream at the time because I thought we could handle this with a simple dependency. Looking through the Trac database it looks like this was reported twice, but upstream does not appear to see this as a problem. They just say to use 4.1.11 or higher. This is also their recommendation due to older versions being buggy. See:

http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/4344
http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/4451

</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>pclouds@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-10-02 05:08:54 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Created an attachment (id=98599)
rails-1.1.6-r1.ebuild

</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>pclouds@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-10-02 05:09:17 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Created an attachment (id=98600)
files/1.1.6-deprecate-old-lighttpd.patch

</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>pclouds@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-10-02 05:11:44 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>I intend to patch rails 1.1.6 only.  Any reason I should patch older versions?
If you can test the attached ebuild, it would be highly appreciated.
I&apos;ll add it to portage some next days if there is no response.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>graaff@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-10-02 12:42:32 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>All the versions of rails &lt; 1.1.6 contain a significant security leak, so they should not be patched but instead removed from portage.

I patch seems to work fine on my system.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>pclouds@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-10-02 22:47:01 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>InCVS</thetext>
          </long_desc>
      
          <attachment
              isobsolete="0"
              ispatch="0"
              isprivate="0"
          >
            <attachid>98599</attachid>
            <date>2006-10-02 05:08 0000</date>
            <desc>rails-1.1.6-r1.ebuild</desc>
            <filename>rails-1.1.6-r1.ebuild</filename>
            <type>text/plain</type>
            <data encoding="base64">IyBDb3B5cmlnaHQgMTk5OS0yMDA2IEdlbnRvbyBGb3VuZGF0aW9uCiMgRGlzdHJpYnV0ZWQgdW5k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</data>        

          </attachment>
          <attachment
              isobsolete="0"
              ispatch="1"
              isprivate="0"
          >
            <attachid>98600</attachid>
            <date>2006-10-02 05:09 0000</date>
            <desc>files/1.1.6-deprecate-old-lighttpd.patch</desc>
            <filename>1.1.6-deprecate-old-lighttpd.patch</filename>
            <type>text/plain</type>
            <data encoding="base64">LS0tIGxpYi9jb21tYW5kcy9zZXJ2ZXIucmIJMjAwNi0wOS0wMyAwNjo0ODowNy4wMDAwMDAwMDAg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</data>        

          </attachment>
    </bug>

</bugzilla>