Skip to content
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

Image urls with no extension and no content-type header fails #23

Open
nickvelloff opened this issue Mar 12, 2015 · 5 comments
Open

Image urls with no extension and no content-type header fails #23

nickvelloff opened this issue Mar 12, 2015 · 5 comments
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@jonnor
Copy link
Member

jonnor commented Mar 17, 2015

@nickvelloff The URL is incomplete, can you paste again?

@jonnor
Copy link
Member

jonnor commented Mar 17, 2015

@nickvelloff cannot reproduce that exact error. However I do get a black image output. Looking at the response data from the input URL, it does not set any Content-Header. This combined with no extension means that we don't know which file type is in use.
What needs to be done is to do sniffing on the actual file content header. Which is not something GEGL does at the moment..

@jonnor jonnor added the bug label Mar 17, 2015
@jonnor jonnor changed the title Cover block can contain image urls with no extension, imgflo errors Image urls with no extension and no content-type header fails Mar 17, 2015
@jonnor jonnor added this to the 0.4 milestone Mar 17, 2015
jonnor added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 17, 2015
@nickvelloff
Copy link
Author

So this is a URL that has been consumed by the /share endpoint. Thus any lack of specific image information required is in the flow of the URL data consumption on the API side. Would this be considered a bug I should surface?

On Mar 17, 2015, at 12:47 PM, Jon Nordby [email protected] wrote:

@nickvelloff https://github.com/nickvelloff cannot reproduce that exact error. However I do get a black image output. Looking at the response data from the input URL, it does not set any Content-Header. This combined with no extension means that we don't know which file type is in use.
What needs to be done is to do sniffing on the actual file content header. Which is not something GEGL does at the moment..


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #23 (comment).

@jonnor
Copy link
Member

jonnor commented Mar 20, 2015

Browsers handle this case, so should imgflo. Its just a bit tricky with the
libraries we use.

But probably could write a little image type sniffer and run that on the
files before passing over to GEGL.
On Mar 20, 2015 6:09 AM, "Nick Velloff" [email protected] wrote:

So this is a URL that has been consumed by the /share endpoint. Thus any
lack of specific image information required is in the flow of the URL data
consumption on the API side. Would this be considered a bug I should
surface?

On Mar 17, 2015, at 12:47 PM, Jon Nordby [email protected]
wrote:

@nickvelloff https://github.com/nickvelloff cannot reproduce that
exact error. However I do get a black image output. Looking at the response
data from the input URL, it does not set any Content-Header. This combined
with no extension means that we don't know which file type is in use.
What needs to be done is to do sniffing on the actual file content
header. Which is not something GEGL does at the moment..


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub <
https://github.com/jonnor/imgflo-server/issues/23#issuecomment-82470894>.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#23 (comment).

@nickvelloff
Copy link
Author

Cool well let me know if you would like me to reproduce the specific payload for testing.

On Mar 20, 2015, at 4:37 AM, Jon Nordby [email protected] wrote:

Browsers handle this case, so should imgflo. Its just a bit tricky with the
libraries we use.

But probably could write a little image type sniffer and run that on the
files before passing over to GEGL.
On Mar 20, 2015 6:09 AM, "Nick Velloff" [email protected] wrote:

So this is a URL that has been consumed by the /share endpoint. Thus any
lack of specific image information required is in the flow of the URL data
consumption on the API side. Would this be considered a bug I should
surface?

On Mar 17, 2015, at 12:47 PM, Jon Nordby [email protected]
wrote:

@nickvelloff https://github.com/nickvelloff cannot reproduce that
exact error. However I do get a black image output. Looking at the response
data from the input URL, it does not set any Content-Header. This combined
with no extension means that we don't know which file type is in use.
What needs to be done is to do sniffing on the actual file content
header. Which is not something GEGL does at the moment..


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub <
https://github.com/jonnor/imgflo-server/issues/23#issuecomment-82470894>.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#23 (comment).


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #23 (comment).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants