From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E264A1FF136 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2026 15:46:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5D4341F7EA; Mon, 23 Mar 2026 15:47:16 +0100 (CET) From: =?UTF-8?q?Fabian=20Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= To: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Hannes Laimer Subject: applied: [PATCH proxmox-backup v2] s3-client: fix Content-Type for put and copy object requests Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 15:47:05 +0100 Message-ID: <177427721192.914168.13980093738277831448.b4-ty@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20260316141940.3576-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> References: <20260316141940.3576-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1774277187100 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.054 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: DABR63ILLIMLPV32U6CWTFCJO3RFCUSW X-Message-ID-Hash: DABR63ILLIMLPV32U6CWTFCJO3RFCUSW X-MailFrom: f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 16 Mar 2026 15:19:40 +0100, Hannes Laimer wrote: > Use the IANA registered `application/octet-stream` content type instead > of the non-standard `binary/octet` value in put_object. > > Also set Content-Type explicitly in copy_object requests, since some S3 > providers drop all source metadata, including Content-Type, when using > x-amz-metadata-directive REPLACE unless it is explicitly provided. This > caused s3_refresh to fail with "missing header 'content-type'" on such > providers when fetching objects moved via copy_object. > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/1] s3-client: fix Content-Type for put and copy object requests commit: 8d6d345f96b427f706c7a3d950e43037252b8e8f Best regards, -- Fabian Grünbichler