FTPHandler.ftp_open in /usr/lib/python2.4/urllib2.py does not support fetching files via FTP on IPv6 due to code like the following: try: host = socket.gethostbyname(host) except socket.error, msg: raise URLError(msg) The python documentation for socket.gethostbyname says, "gethostbyname() does not support IPv6 name resolution, and getaddrinfo() should be used instead for IPv4/v6 dual stack support." The whole file needs to be audited for other such problems that could affect fetching via IPv6. This impacts installation in that we cannot support FTP IPv6 installs, even though the anaconda loader does (because it's code that we wrote and adapted for this requirement).
I guess this is the reason why: urlgrabber http://ftp.ipv6.funet.fi/pub/Linux/00Directory_info.txt works, but this: urlgrabber ftp://ftp.ipv6.funet.fi/pub/Linux/00Directory_info.txt gives: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/urlgrabber", line 124, in ? main() File "/usr/bin/urlgrabber", line 120, in main filename = urlgrab(url,filename=file,**kwargs) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/urlgrabber/grabber.py", line 597, in urlgrab return default_grabber.urlgrab(url, filename, **kwargs) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/urlgrabber/grabber.py", line 927, in urlgrab return self._retry(opts, retryfunc, url, filename) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/urlgrabber/grabber.py", line 845, in _retry r = apply(func, (opts,) + args, {}) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/urlgrabber/grabber.py", line 913, in retryfunc fo = URLGrabberFileObject(url, filename, opts) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/urlgrabber/grabber.py", line 1001, in __init__ self._do_open() File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/urlgrabber/grabber.py", line 1068, in _do_open fo, hdr = self._make_request(req, opener) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/urlgrabber/grabber.py", line 1184, in _make_request raise URLGrabError(4, _('IOError: %s') % (e, )) urlgrabber.grabber.URLGrabError: [Errno 4] IOError: <urlopen error (-5, 'No address associated with hostname')>
Patch submitted upstream to Python for urllib2.py: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1675455&group_id=5470&atid=305470 Looks like byterange.py in python-urlgrabber is based on urllib2.py, so the gethostbyname() usage there should be changed to getaddrinfo() calls.
Please apply this patch to Fedora's python package. If you're not sure whether it's stable, push it at least to rawhide/updates-testing repo.
I'd really like to see upstream python at least commenting in a positive direction before adding this. Otherwise, this is something that's somewhat likely to break over time and require repatching or patching more places.
Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported against rawhide during the development of a Fedora release that is no longer maintained. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained. If this bug remains in NEEDINFO thirty (30) days from now, we will automatically close it. If you can reproduce this bug in a maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or rawhide), please change this bug to the respective version and change the status to ASSIGNED. (If you're unable to change the bug's version or status, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.) Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again.
This bug is still valid.
Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
This bug is still valid - even against F10 as far as I can see.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 9 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 9. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '9'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 9's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 9 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
From my point of view, this bug report is still valid, moving to Rawhide.
The upstream report dcantrell made in comment #2 is now here: http://bugs.python.org/issue1675455
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 12 development cycle. Changing version to '12'. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
I give up on this ever being fixed. WONTFIX, apparently.