From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A20C5D158
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:50:06 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 83597153E6
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:50:06 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:50:06 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C68474843F;
 Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:50:05 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <b4c34880-c3c9-43af-b2ed-5040558eea31@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:50:05 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>,
 Philipp Hufnagl <p.hufnagl@proxmox.com>
References: <20230911135658.1828454-1-p.hufnagl@proxmox.com>
 <2366cd7c-68b9-452a-b72e-5458f47f4276@proxmox.com>
 <1695210325.863ju9zr7b.astroid@yuna.none>
From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1695210325.863ju9zr7b.astroid@yuna.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.011 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
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager v7 0/2] fix #4849: allow download of
 compressed ISOs
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 11:50:06 -0000

On 9/20/23 13:46, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> On September 20, 2023 1:07 pm, Dominik Csapak wrote:
>> LGTM and works as advertised.
> 
> it breaks downloading container templates that are compressed with one
> of the "known" compression algorithms (such as gz).
> 
> probably the detect-compression parameter and handling needs to go back
> in (that was the reason it was there in the first place!), or some other
> solution needs to be found..
> 
> 

ah yes ofc, sorry for the oversight

couldn't we simply check in the backend for the download for the content type?
as we only really need to unpack isos?