-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Question: Is there a way around permission checks? #1247
Comments
I am thinking of removing these checks entirely. They were added to help beginner users with common permission issues when mounting via Docker Desktop on macOS/Windows, but they cause problems for advanced users on network filesystems or who want to manage permissions more granularly.
|
Ok I removed the forced |
Great, thanks! Do you plan to push the change to Docker Hub anytime soon? 🙏🏻 |
@pirate I've tried pulling the :dev image, and I'm seeing some weird behavior. |
Hmm strange ok I'll remove the top-level chown. What OS are you using on the host? |
Similar issue here. I used to use image with Got errors bellow:
I just deployed a new instance for test. If I mount a empty folder, the Update: If I just mount a local folder, everything works perfectly without any permission issue. This should be related with strange behavior is NFS mounting. |
@zblesk and @p0n1 both of your issues should be fixed by passing the PUID & PGID environment variables to the container containing the UID & GID you want the files to be owned by. This matches the behavior of all LinuxServer.io docker images, and is a general common standard for many containers. I'm moving away from force-chowning the data dir in favor of this standard as it's a better practice to ask the user what the ownership should be rather than reset it by force. https://docs.linuxserver.io/general/understanding-puid-and-pgid I also made some changes to the entrypoint script. Can you try setting those variables, pulling/building the latest |
@pirate |
Thanks for replying. @pirate I just deployed a new instance for testing again. I set the Just as @mAAdhaTTah raised, maybe I'm not using the latest |
My apologies, just fixed the build and just pushed
# pull the :latest image from docker hub (also published to ghcr.io/archivebox/archivebox)
docker pull archivebox/archivebox
# get detailed info about the build and dependency versions
docker run archivebox/archivebox cat /VERSION.txt
docker run -it archivebox/archivebox version
# run update to retry any previously failed downloads using the latest extractor versions
docker run -it -v $PWD:/data archivebox/archivebox update |
Thanks for the update @pirate. I just tested the latest I also figured out why many permission errors for my case and even can't start a new container instance when I mount the NFS folder filled with archivebox archives. It relates with the following code. ArchiveBox/bin/docker_entrypoint.sh Lines 21 to 27 in c6e5a56
This script couldn't write into ref: |
Because of space constraints, I had to move my big archive from the server to a NAS. I've then mounted the archive via NFS and pointed Archivebox to it.
I haven't been able to get it running since.
It always only gets to:
The archive is ~300GB big and because of how it's structured, all FS-level operations take a lot of time.
I've tried chowning it myself, which took over 4 hours.
I apparently didn't hit the correct perm combo, because the message just appears again.
I've let the container run for ~17 hours, which should be more than enough, but nothing changed.
(I'm currently running a differenattempt at a maual fix, but I'm not holding out much hope.)
Is there any way around this? Overriding which user is used (UID and GID in Compose don'd seem to do anything), or maybe letting it run as root and skip perm checks, or something?
(I have also temporarily stopped and disabled Sonic, just to be sure.)
Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: