Add a CACHEDIR.TAG file to tmp/ #13653
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Note that this does not handle cases where users delete the whole tmp/ directory. However, it is to be expected that users depending on that file would take care not to delete it. Fixes matomo-org#12754
Findus23
added
Help wanted
|
Tested with borgbackup locally, works w/ the |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Ellipsis
This PR adds a simple
CACHEDIR.TAGfile, as recognised by some backup solutions. This originated in issue #12754, which I assume is accepting PRs.Note that I have modified the URL: The original
http://www.brynosaurus.com/cachedir/is now showing an error page (blocked by Yale for malware?), but http://www.bford.info/cachedir/ seems to be an alias.Caveats
This assumes that users would not just go and delete the entire
tmp/directory. A periodic check for theCACHEDIR.TAGwould fix this, but I wasn't sure where to put it in the code. It's probably not something we want to do at every request. Also, this might be considered unnecessary overhead for most use cases. It might be sensible to assume that users relying on this file would take care, but I don't think that is a very safe assumption to make.It could also be considered to include a check for
CACHEDIR.TAGin theSystem Checkpage, but again, only very few users will probably care about that.This PR does not add any tests because it does not add any code.
Fixes #12754