Fix #28121
I did some tests and found that the `missing signature key` error is
caused by an incorrect `Content-Type` header. Gitea correctly sets the
`Content-Type` header when serving files.
348d1d0f32/routers/api/packages/container/container.go (L712-L717)
However, when `SERVE_DIRECT` is enabled, the `Content-Type` header may
be set to an incorrect value by the storage service. To fix this issue,
we can use query parameters to override response header values.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/API/API_GetObject.html
<img width="600px"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f2ff90f0-f1df-46f9-9680-b8120222c555"
/>
In this PR, I introduced a new parameter to the `URL` method to support
additional parameters.
```
URL(path, name string, reqParams url.Values) (*url.URL, error)
```
---
Most S3-like services support specifying the content type when storing
objects. However, Gitea always use `application/octet-stream`.
Therefore, I believe we also need to improve the `Save` method to
support storing objects with the correct content type.
b7fb20e73e/modules/storage/minio.go (L214-L221)
(cherry picked from commit 0690cb076bf63f71988a709f62a9c04660b51a4f)
Conflicts:
- modules/storage/azureblob.go
Dropped the change, as we do not support Azure blob storage.
- modules/storage/helper.go
Resolved by adjusting their `discardStorage` to our
`DiscardStorage`
- routers/api/actions/artifacts.go
routers/api/actions/artifactsv4.go
routers/web/repo/actions/view.go
routers/web/repo/download.go
Resolved the conflicts by manually adding the new `nil`
parameter to the `storage.Attachments.URL()` calls.
Originally conflicted due to differences in the if expression
above these calls.
Multiple chunks are uploaded with type "block" without using
"appendBlock" and eventually out of order for bigger uploads.
8MB seems to be the chunk size
This change parses the blockList uploaded after all blocks to get the
final artifact size and order them correctly before calculating the
sha256 checksum over all blocks
Fixes #31354
(cherry picked from commit b594cec2bda6f861effedb2e8e0a7ebba191c0e9)
Conflicts:
routers/api/actions/artifactsv4.go
conflict because of Refactor AppURL usage (#30885) 67c1a07285008cc00036a87cef966c3bd519a50c
that was not cherry-picked in Forgejo
the resolution consist of removing the extra ctx argument
The previous commit laid out the foundation of the quota engine, this
one builds on top of it, and implements the actual enforcement.
Enforcement happens at the route decoration level, whenever possible. In
case of the API, when over quota, a 413 error is returned, with an
appropriate JSON payload. In case of web routes, a 413 HTML page is
rendered with similar information.
This implementation is for a **soft quota**: quota usage is checked
before an operation is to be performed, and the operation is *only*
denied if the user is already over quota. This makes it possible to go
over quota, but has the significant advantage of being practically
implementable within the current Forgejo architecture.
The goal of enforcement is to deny actions that can make the user go
over quota, and allow the rest. As such, deleting things should - in
almost all cases - be possible. A prime exemption is deleting files via
the web ui: that creates a new commit, which in turn increases repo
size, thus, is denied if the user is over quota.
Limitations
-----------
Because we generally work at a route decorator level, and rarely
look *into* the operation itself, `size:repos:public` and
`size:repos:private` are not enforced at this level, the engine enforces
against `size:repos:all`. This will be improved in the future.
AGit does not play very well with this system, because AGit PRs count
toward the repo they're opened against, while in the GitHub-style fork +
pull model, it counts against the fork. This too, can be improved in the
future.
There's very little done on the UI side to guard against going over
quota. What this patch implements, is enforcement, not prevention. The
UI will still let you *try* operations that *will* result in a denial.
Signed-off-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
I noticed that Forgejo does not allow HTTP range requests when downloading artifacts. All other file downloads like releases and packages support them.
So I looked at the code and found that the artifact download endpoint uses a simple io.Copy to serve the file contents instead of using the established `ServeContentByReadSeeker` function which does take range requests into account.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/4218
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: ThetaDev <thetadev@magenta.de>
Co-committed-by: ThetaDev <thetadev@magenta.de>
Fixes #28853
Needs both https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/pulls/473 and
https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/pulls/471 on the runner side and
patched `actions/upload-artifact@v4` / `actions/download-artifact@v4`,
like `christopherhx/gitea-upload-artifact@v4` and
`christopherhx/gitea-download-artifact@v4`, to not return errors due to
GHES not beeing supported yet.
(cherry picked from commit a53d268aca87a281aadc2246541f8749eddcebed)
