Go Back   FlashFXP Forums > > > >

ioFTPD General New releases, comments, questions regarding the latest version of ioFTPD.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 05-12-2010, 12:37 AM   #76
o_dog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 692
Default

hmmm, it seems i'm not alone with my problem on windows7 32bit. and it does seem more and more like this is a ioFTPD bug since no other application lockup like this no matter how big the transfer.

is this going to be fixed anytime soon?
__________________
ioNiNJA
o_dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2010, 06:17 AM   #77
irccat
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 13
Default

hi.Yil

hey.man. ver.ioFTPD v7.4.3

Is the use possible from window 2003?

my.computer.

Does not become from window 2003.....

Solution plan..Solution plan....

but.. use Is possible... ( IoFTPD.v5.8.5r )..
irccat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2010, 01:29 PM   #78
Yil
Too much time...
FlashFXP Beta Tester
ioFTPD Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,194
Default

irccat: I'm not sure what you're asking. What OS are you trying to use?


I've still got a few things to finish up before the v7.5 release but hopefully it should be out in a few days...
Yil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2010, 05:49 AM   #79
mr.babek
Member
FlashFXP Beta Tester
ioFTPD Foundation User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 82
Exclamation Side by side error?

Hey Guys,

I wanted to upgrade to the latest ioFTPD build, but it won;t start on w2008r2 server 64bits.
I get this error:


Log Name: Application
Source: SideBySide
Date: 5/13/2010 12:45:17 PM
Event ID: 33
Task Category: None
Level: Error
Keywords: Classic
User: N/A
Computer: ACHILLES
Description:
Activation context generation failed for "C:\FtpMain\ioFTPD\system\ioFTPD.exe". Dependent Assembly Microsoft.VC90.CRT,processorArchitecture="x86",pub licKeyToken="1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b",type="win32",versio n="9.0.21022.8" could not be found. Please use sxstrace.exe for detailed diagnosis.
Event Xml:
<Event xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/win/2004/08/events/event">
<System>
<Provider Name="SideBySide" />
<EventID Qualifiers="49409">33</EventID>
<Level>2</Level>
<Task>0</Task>
<Keywords>0x80000000000000</Keywords>
<TimeCreated SystemTime="2010-05-13T10:45:17.000000000Z" />
<EventRecordID>2125</EventRecordID>
<Channel>Application</Channel>
<Computer>ACHILLES</Computer>
<Security />
</System>
<EventData>
<Data>Microsoft.VC90.CRT,processorArchitecture="x8 6",publicKeyToken="1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b",type="win32", version="9.0.21022.8"</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>C:\FtpMain\ioFTPD\system\ioFTPD.exe</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
<Data>
</Data>
</EventData>
</Event>
mr.babek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2010, 11:35 AM   #80
Yil
Too much time...
FlashFXP Beta Tester
ioFTPD Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,194
Default

mr.babek: That is easily solved. I switched to dynamically linked runtimes instead of static ones. This is usually considered a good thing and for applications with installers they handle this behind the scenes. ioFTPD doesn't have an installer, so you'll have to do this part manually.

Grab the runtime from Microsoft: Visual Studio 2008 SP1 Runtime

After installing it you should be good to go.
Yil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2010, 12:44 PM   #81
pion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 138
Default

chmod = 1M

with flag 1
[1] site chmod 777 /TV-DIVX-ARCHIVE/_ARCHIVE01/Royal.Pains/
[1] 500 /TV-DIVX-ARCHIVE/_ARCHIVE01/Royal.Pains/: Permission denied (directory mode).

with flag M
[1] site chmod 777 /TV-DIVX-ARCHIVE/_ARCHIVE01/Royal.Pains/
[1] 200 'chmod' Command successful.
pion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2010, 01:37 PM   #82
pion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 138
Default

Reporting queued error: faulting application ioFTPD.exe, version 7.3.3.0, faulting module tcl85t.dll, version 8.5.2.8, fault address 0x0007ad1f.

Then 7 seconds later:

Subprocess monitoring failed due to subprocess is no longer active. The subprocess is probably dead. Restarting the process. Error detail: N/A
pion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2010, 02:49 PM   #83
Yil
Too much time...
FlashFXP Beta Tester
ioFTPD Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,194
Default

pion: What are the permissions on the directory? Non-VM flagged users must have write permission to the directory if they wish to modify its permissions. The "Permission Denied (directory mode)" includes the reason why. The user probably isn't the owner and the mask is 755 or not a member of the group and the mask is 775 or something. Unless the directory is 777 a SiteOp who is a non-owner non-group member who isn't a VM flagged user cannot change that directories permissions. While not specifically applicable the "site perms [<what>]" command might be useful.

I have zero clue about that TCL error. I'll have to poke around but my guess is it failed to start a process for some reason... Server out of memory? Kernel memory? Handles? Check for something in the windows event log around the same time. I've never seen that before though.
Yil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2010, 03:54 PM   #84
pion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 138
Default

Why cannot +1 users issue chmod, when config cleary sais they're allowed? Or better yet - how can +1 users chmod the directory to 777 ? I also sendt you some crash logs that might be helpful..
pion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2010, 05:49 PM   #85
Yil
Too much time...
FlashFXP Beta Tester
ioFTPD Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,194
Default

I looked up the test for chmod. It's a bit more restrictive than I just said. You must be the owner (group isn't good enough) and have write access to the parent of the item via owner, group, or other. M flagged users are immune from all access checks so they can always do anything, but VFS Admins (V flag) are only immune from read/visibility checks so they would still require +w to the parent of the item, but are immune from the owner test. Of course VFS Admins could always change the permission of the parent(s) to grant themselves +w provided the entire directory tree isn't read-only all the way up to root.

This prevents everyone but Masters from deleting stuff in a directory marked read-only which is a safety feature. Note that if you are in a directory you can delete subdirectories that are read-only such as might happen with a zipscript. Normally you would use a Wipe script to delete stuff in read-only directories and it would confirm that you weren't doing something stupid...

But back to chmod. I can see why you might want SiteOps to be able to chmod anything they can see but normally things like that were done by VFS Admins as they are the people who can modify the filesystem. SiteOps were for everything else but generally dealt with user account management.

But I'm persuaded that there are cases where you might want to give someone the ability to chmod something they don't own without making them a VFS Admin. I'll add a .ini option to remove the owner test so SiteOps will work like VFS Admins which I think should solve your problem.
Yil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2010, 04:51 AM   #86
pion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 138
Default

Any timeframe on when your new fixit all release will be out? Because I have to manually restart sites on an hourly (!!) basis, just to maintain some level of uptime..
pion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2010, 08:57 AM   #87
o_dog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 692
Default

YiL: any news on my bug? since there isn't much i can do about it, it seems?
__________________
ioNiNJA
o_dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2010, 09:54 AM   #88
pion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 138
Default

You have the same bug as me o_dog.. the one that locks up the process if you're running nxmydb.
pion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2010, 11:08 AM   #89
o_dog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 692
Default

no, my transfers just stops for some reason and never resume. seems like it's ioftpd since no other app has this behavior. The thing is i have no idea what is happening since no error message is produced.
__________________
ioNiNJA
o_dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2010, 12:10 AM   #90
Yil
Too much time...
FlashFXP Beta Tester
ioFTPD Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,194
Default

o_dog: Because you only see this issue with FXP transfers it makes diagnosing it harder. I'm still not convinced there is a server error. However, there are 2 possible issues I'm looking at right now. The first is a slow sender and ioFTPD thinks the connection is still active. V7.5 will offer you the option to change the per-packet timeout to whatever you want in case that helps. On the to-do list for a v7.6+ release is FXP progress reporting so you could verify that it's still in progress but because that might affect my socket stability work I decided against it for the next release.

I've also found a huge bug! In my 10 connection at a time upload case for stefano I found that I was getting some weird results. It turns out the server was passing the port re-use flag to the bind function which means it could give out the same port to 2 different PASV calls with the possible result that 2 files would get switched when uploaded! I verified this goes back to 5.8.5 so it's nothing new. If you randomize the passive port range and use say 50 ports the chances are slim but it can happen. If you don't randomize (Random = FALSE for a Device) it's nearly impossible with a large range so that's a good work-around right now. My test case with just 2 randomize passive ports and 10 brand new connections all at the same time had issues, but that's why I try weird config test cases. I just don't personally use a FTP client that does multiple connections all at once so it never popped up before...

The reason this might be important is if you have a small passive port range and someone or many people all starting uploads at the same time it's possible the server thinks the transfer is in progress because it actually is! Just not yours... You might be able to confirm this if you can check the xferlog to see if the file that you got stuck on eventually reports itself in the transfer log. You can manually try to abort the transfer, which should work, and then check the log right away as well to see what it says. Check that it was being sent from the host you were FXPing from or that it was still in progress by looking at the total transfer time field. Another clue would be uploads to a .sfv verified dir and the server reporting a crc failure.

This is a bad error for non-sfv dirs to handle though. I can't believe we've gone this long without people diagnosing the problem and *****ing about it...

pion: I'm pretty convinced at this point that using my custom nxmydb and libmysql probably means neither are at fault. I don't know why you have this problem so often yet, but I've got 2-3 really good changes in v7.5 and we'll have to hope it helps. The restart logic is VASTLY better so even if not fixed it will be all automatic soon.

I still need to finish up a couple of things but should be out in a day or so provided I don't find anything new. I've probably put over 60 hours in the last 2 weeks alone on this, so I'm working as fast as I can
Yil is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
case, dir, experimental, ioftpd, link

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:59 PM.

Parts of this site powered by vBulletin Mods & Addons from DragonByte Technologies Ltd. (Details)