[bug] Uploading a folder with multiple depths failed.

[textrix]

Description of the bug

• [bug] Folders upload successfully but UI shows error #635: in addition to the previous issue, folders with a depth of 2 or more would fail to upload.

Step by step instructions to reproduce the bug

• Folder structure at client (Windows 10, Ubuntu 22.04 Desktop)

Rufus/
├── rufus.log
└── syslinux-6.04
    ├── 20200816
    │   ├── ldlinux.bss
    │   └── ldlinux.sys
    ├── ldlinux.bss
    └── ldlinux.sys

• Drag and drop the Rufus folder into the upload box in filestash.

• When the upload starts, I see an error.
  

• If you cancel the upload, the files in the first depth will be uploaded successfully, even though they are in error in the display.
  

• However, the files in the second-deep directory do not work, with the circle spinning to indicate that they are in progress.
  

Can you replicate that error from the demo?

Yes

Observed behavior

Failed

Expected behavior

Uploading the folder should work fine.

[mickael-kerjean]

I just realised that when you made that issue, the fix available from #635 didn't got build yet so if you were not manually building Filestash you would have still see it until 2 weeks ago.

Can you still replicate that today from the demo? If so can you share a zip with a folder from which I can replicate this from the demo?

[textrix]

I tested it today with a demo site and a freshly built image and it works fine. At the time I raised this issue, the demo site was broken, and a separate version I built had the same issue.

However, the desired upload behavior is now working fine., Thank you

Also, please take a look at my PR #652. It's about making the binaries of tex-related packages selectable based on the CPU architecture, so that I can build for my Arm CPU. (AArch64 on Oracle Cloud)

[mickael-kerjean]

great, Yep I didn't take much look onto it yet as this part of the build will likely change a lot in the next few months as:

1. I am rewriting a big part of the frontend, cleaning up tons of stuff and have a dilemma here with the size of the default build. In one hand, there's a lot of benefits to be had by just removing that part entirely to massively slim down the docker image. The latex part is made to support the org mode functionality for which I have no idea how many people are actually using outside myself as I never heard or seen anyone else actually using it. On the other hand, I'm a total emacs fan boy and absolutely love org mode and would much prefer to keep that part despite the cost on image size. Since the PR involved the latex side of things, it got me back to that dilemma and didn't realise it only improve the existing.

2. As docker hub is changing, I currently have an OSS account that has to be renewed every year but their policies to OSS forbid any kind of commercial activity around the usage of the OSS account. My account got luckily renewed this year but I got very scared as I got to realised that migrating over to any other service say Amazon ECR would cost upward of 10k per month from ingress alone with the current level of docker pull we currently get. Since that time I've started to look at other options like slimming down the base image to reduce the cost or even stop distributing docker image entirely if distribution cost an harm and a leg when I can distribute linux packages directly for cheap on a simple apache server. Anyway all those questions are still in there and all link back to the latex compiler