Problems with Dotfiles

[Dominik Blunk]

With the newest version 3.2.4 (Windows) no dotfiles (eg .htaccess) are listed on server side. I checked that I have no filter activated. I did a cross check with 3.1.5.1 (Fedora) and that works fine. I cannot retrieve dotfiles by manually typing in the command (eg retr .htaccess):

15:18:44 Befehl: RETR .htaccess
15:18:44 Antwort: 550 Can't open .htaccess: No such file or directory

But the file is there - with 3.1.5.1 on Fedora that works excellent!

I tried both, FTPES and FTP connections - same result...

FTP-Server is Pure-FTPd [TLS], Version ?

Any Ideas what goes wrong?

[Dominik Blunk]

Forget the part about the manual command - the path was wrong:

15:18:44 Befehl: RETR .htaccess
15:18:44 Antwort: 550 Can't open .htaccess: No such file or directory

I'm not able to retrieve a file manually so I cannot I checked with the delete command:

16:38:05 Befehl: dele .htaccess
16:38:05 Antwort: 250 Deleted .htaccess

That works!

[Tim Kosse]

If the file exists but is not displayed by your server, then your server is broken.

Please upgrade to a proper server.

[Dominik Blunk]

How do you explain that it works with 3.1.5 and NOT with 3.2.4 with the same Server? I don't think its the server's problem here to be honest...

[Dominik Blunk]

Additional test: I installed 3.1.5.1 on my windows machine, used same settings and surprise surprise all dotfiles are displayed again... same server, same settings, different client version and it works...
Sorry to be a bit naggy about this but I like Filezilla and I'm just trying to help it make better - and as you states yourself: please report all bugs you may encounter ;-)

[Tim Kosse]

Older versions use LIST which uses a nonstandardized listing format.

New versions uses MLSD as defined in RFC 3659 which uses a standardized listing format.

[Bas]

Perhaps a good idea to at least think about making it an issue of choice?

i mean, make the 'LIST' or 'MLSD' configurable somewhere. This makes filezilla compatible with older ftpservers.

you can be very right, but if the rest of the world is very wrong it doesn't help you much..

If all sites would be only w3 complient, not 1 site would work in IE. you think web developers do that?
No, cause they lose visitors (customers).
Same goes for filezilla

[Tim Kosse]

Perhaps a good idea to at least think about making it an issue of choice?

You have the choice to upgrade to a proper server or to refrain from use filenames starting with a dot.

Did you contact the server administrator yet? I bet not.

If all sites would be only w3 complient, not 1 site would work in IE.

I'd welcome that.

Same goes for filezilla

I don't have customers, just users. Big difference.

Sorry to disappoint you, but MLSD stays. It's the broken servers who need to be changed. End of discussion.

[Bas]

well end of me using your lousy product then.

cu...

P.S.
you could be a nice guy, but i bet being a pain in the ass works much better for you

[Tim Kosse]

Please stop changing the priority to critical, this is not a security vulnerability.

[Dominik Blunk]

I had a little chat with Frank, one of the PureFTPd developers, which gave me more insight on this subject:

"...the LIST command can explicitely ask for dot files and clients often do. The MLSD command has no way to tell if it wants them to show up or not. The current pure-ftpd behavior depends on the --displaydotfiles (-D) switch. If it is enabled, they will show up. If not, they won't."

That would explain why older Filezilla clients showed the dotfiles and the newer versions not.

After enabling the --displaydotfiles switch the newest Filezilla show all dotfiles again. Maybe this applies for other ftp servers too!

And finally a notice about future pure-ftpd releases: "Thanks to your head up, this has just been changed to always show them with MLSD, regardless of the --displaydotfiles option."

[Tim Kosse]

For completeness' sake: Strictly speaking "LIST -a", the command to explicitly ask to display dotfiles, is against the FTP specifications.