10000 sftp: support rename extension for server by kardianos · Pull Request #301 · pkg/sftp · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to content

sftp: support rename extension for server #301

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

kardianos
Copy link
Contributor

Previously if a client makes an unsupported operation,
like a POSIX rename, it would exit the server.

Both support POSIX rename, and do not abort the connection
if there is an unsupported operation is made by the client.

Previously if a client makes an unsupported operation,
like a POSIX rename, it would exit the server.

Both support POSIX rename, and do not abort the connection
if there is an unsupported operation is made by the client.
@kardianos
Copy link
Contributor Author

@eikenb Let me know if something else is needed. Previous behavior terminated loop (closed connection) when client requested an extension when using sftp.Handlers implementation. Now it will return an error if not implemented (not terminate loop) or in the case of openssh rename, just handle it like a normal rename.

Also I might add a go.mod PR if you don't mind.

@kardianos
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ping.

@eikenb
Copy link
Member
eikenb commented Aug 26, 2019

Hey @kardianos, thanks for the PR.

I haven't had a lot of time for this project lately, but I'm trying to make some time. I'll look at this soon.

@eikenb
Copy link
Member
eikenb commented Aug 26, 2019

Actually, I'm already looking at this. Realized when reading through #299 that we didn't handle extended packets in either server and was looking into fixing that.

@eikenb
Copy link
Member
eikenb commented Aug 26, 2019

So I think I'm just going to merge this. It works and doesn't conflict (much) with the other 2 extended packet related PRs. I'm going to pull in all 3 and then get things working and go from there. I'm going to do the merge locally as there will be a few conflicts that I'd prefer to resolve locally vs. githuts tool. Thanks.

@eikenb
Copy link
Member
eikenb commented Aug 26, 2019

Merged.
I rebased before merging, which changed the ids and so it didn't auto-close.

@eikenb eikenb closed this Aug 26, 2019
@kardianos
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks! (I understand about having little time :) )

@eikenb eikenb added this to the v1.11.0 milestone Sep 29, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants
0