Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.
Bug 84549 - vsftpd - files > 2GB inaccessible
Summary: vsftpd - files > 2GB inaccessible
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: vsftpd
Version: 7.3
Hardware: i386
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Bill Nottingham
QA Contact: Mike McLean
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2003-02-18 18:16 UTC by Rick Johnson
Modified: 2014-03-17 02:34 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2003-02-18 19:45:56 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Rick Johnson 2003-02-18 18:16:22 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; YComp

Description of problem:
Files larger than 2GB cannot be listed or downloaded using vsftpd 1.01

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
With vsftpd installed:
1. Create a file over >2GB in size in a place accessible via FTP
2. Login using local account or anon which has access to location with >2GB file
3. Do directory listing in directory where large file is present.
4. Attempt to get file using valid file name.

Actual Results:  Step 3 - files >2GB in size are not displayed.
Step 4 - file cannot be retrieved

Expected Results:  Step 3 - file should be listed
Step 4 - file should be available for retrieval

Additional info:

Updating to Rawhide package VSFTPD 1.1.3 seems to have solved the issue. 
Perhaps patching backwards so users do not have to give up xinetd functionality 
in Red Hat 7.3 (vsftpd-1.0.1) would be helpful in fixing this bug.

Comment 1 Rick Johnson 2003-02-18 18:24:56 UTC
1.0.1-8 shows:

in the changelog. 

Can we make this bugfix available via up2date?

Comment 2 Bill Nottingham 2003-02-18 19:45:56 UTC
At this point, unlikely.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.