Closed Bug 378714 Opened 18 years ago Closed 18 years ago

AllPeers 0.56 stubs need swapping out

Categories

(mozilla.org Graveyard :: Server Operations, task)

task
Not set
major

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: matthew.gertner, Assigned: oremj)

References

()

Details

Assignee: server-ops → oremj
Would you mind trying to upload this through the admin interface first.
Lately a few limits have been adjusted that may allow this large of a file to be uploaded through the developer interface.
I tried but it went quickly to an HTTP Connection Failed screen, presumably because the file size is still too large.
Justin, would you mind generating the sql for these.
We can update the hashes/sizes from the admin control panel now, all you have to do is move the files :) See http://wiki.mozilla.org/Update:Admins/Large_Files for the new process.
The files are now there with their filenames from allpeers.com. I also see some rc23 files in the allpeers directory. If those files need replaced please reopen the bug.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 18 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Yeah, those rc23 files are what need to be overwritten. The filenames should be: * allpeers_beta-0.56rc23-fx-linux.xpi (2 KB) - Linux * allpeers_beta-0.56rc23-fx-macosx.xpi (2 KB) - MacOSX * allpeers_beta-0.56rc23-fx-win.xpi (2 KB) - Windows
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
Done.
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 18 years ago18 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Hooray, sizes and hashes updated. * allpeers_beta-0.56rc23-fx-linux.xpi (5639 KB) - Linux * allpeers_beta-0.56rc23-fx-macosx.xpi (8201 KB) - MacOSX * allpeers_beta-0.56rc23-fx-win.xpi (4398 KB) - Windows
Sorry about this, I screwed up the version number and left our internal "rc" suffix in there. A few people complained about this so I've uploaded new stubs without the suffix and replaced the real files in the same location as that mentioned in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378714#c0 Can we do the stub shuffle one more time? Sorry again for the inconvenience.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
We don't really believe in replacing files once they've been served to users with a given version number. Please upload new stubs with a new version number if you want them replaced (just like you'd do if we could handle your big-boned XPIs, as it were!).
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 18 years ago18 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
(In reply to comment #11). > We don't really believe in replacing files once they've been served to users > with a given version number. Please upload new stubs with a new version number > if you want them replaced (just like you'd do if we could handle your big-boned > XPIs, as it were!). Served to what users? The version wasn't approved yet or made available for download. If you misunderstood this, could you reopen this bug? If not, let me know and I will proceed as you suggest.
SHAVER HATE! SHAVER MAKE INCONVENIENT FOR PLASTICMILLION FOR OWN AMUSEMENT! Actually, no, that's fine; I'm feeling like a softie today. (Sorry, Gijs.)
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
Btw, Justin, is there any chance you can flip the "approved" switch once the stubs are successfully swapped? With the time zone differences it can be hard to get an editor during our work day.
Swapped.
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 18 years ago18 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
New file hash and sizes recalculated and made public.
I'm not sure what went wrong, but I'm seeing Firefox that a version 0.56 is available. However, when I download it I end up with version 0.56rc23 (in the install.rdf). The files I placed on our website for swapping definitely have the right version number (just double-checked) but I guess that the old, faulty versions somehow ended up online (with version 0.56rc23). Unfortunately update.rdf (or the AMO equivalent) thinks the version is 0.56. We have a special "new version" alert in our sidebar and right now it's impossible to get rid of it once you've installed the AMO version.
Severity: normal → major
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
That's a different issue, please file it as a different bug.
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 18 years ago18 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Bleh, my bad. I got sidetracked by the reference to the update.rdf. oremj: when you did the swap again, did you use the locations in comment 0? Sounds like the wrong files were used here.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
(In reply to comment #19) > Bleh, my bad. I got sidetracked by the reference to the update.rdf. (raises eyebrow) > oremj: when you did the swap again, did you use the locations in comment 0? > Sounds like the wrong files were used here. The locations in comment 0 are correct since I (foolishly?) replaced the bad files (with 0.56rc23 in install.rdf) with the good files (with 0.56 in install.rdf) at the same location. But it sounds to me like some old versions of the files were used rather than downloading the new files from our website. Anyway, the good files are still there and if they are used, everything should be hunky-dory.
These bug has been made redundant by https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=379049
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 18 years ago18 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Product: mozilla.org → mozilla.org Graveyard
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.