http_fetch with image upload

[kkfin]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

Is there still any 401 errors when you try.

[Steve Workings]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

No, I get a 200 which is good, and the file is there. But it's no longer a useful image -- any jpg or .png I upload is no longer an image - just unusable.

[kkfin]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

In your example you use an image.
I am sure you understand my previous posts but just to make sure

f = file.to_blob("C:\A5Webroot\Hoff_3.jpg")
f = base64encode(f)

or

f = file.to_blob("C:\A5Webroot\Hoff_3.jpg")
f = base64encode_file(f)

In both cases f is corrupt/not valid syntax at least in my tests. I am not able to convert f back to image (I do not use alpha to convert it back). Make sure that your f is valid. Edit: Base64encode is totally wrong, there is some = in begin of file and base64encode_file adds line breaks which do not belong there.

[Steve Workings]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

Thanks for sticking with this Ken. But that's my point. I know that what I'm doing is not correct -- it produces a file on the server that is not an image.

So the question is: what is correct? How do I do this?

[kkfin]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

Better move to .Net.
This code seems to produce right format at least with images I tested

save_to_file(system::Convert::ToBase64String(system::io::file::ReadAllBytes("C:\A5Webroot\Hoff_3.jpg")),"C:\A5Webroot\proper64.txt")

[Lenny Forziati]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

Kenneth - you seem to be saying that base64encode() in Xbasic does not match what .Net produces. If you have a reproducible case of this, please send us a bug report with the files that will cause this condition. In my testing, base64encode() creates exactly what .Net creates:

dim imgfn as c = "C:\dev\Lenny-Forziati.jpg"
dim xb64 as c = base64encode(file.to_blob(imgfn))
dim net64 as c = system::Convert::ToBase64String(file.to_blob(imgfn))

?xb64 == net64
= .T

Steve - you should carefully examine exactly what is sent by a browser on a successful upload with what is sent by http_fetch() that does not work. I still suspect that your POST body is not in the format that is expected/required by Google.

[jgrannis]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

Since you got back past the authorization issue, have you tried the PUT method again?
If using POST, are you sure the object has been removed before posting(creating) it again?
And it isn't clear how you are determining the content-length after doing the f = base64encode(fb)


EDIT: Or try to get rid of Content-Length header and replace it with this: Transfer-Encoding: chunked

EDIT 2: Now I'm thinking that you shouldn't POST a base64encoded string to Google. Keep it as a blob as you had in your original message. of course make sure you have the updated headers concerning ssl that you didn't originally have as far as I could see.
If the blob route still doesn't work, I suppose you could try to add the base64 prefix to the string if it isn't already (which I imagine it isn't). Then on the Google side you could decode it. Or perhaps with the prefix present, if you redownloaded it, the client browser would decode it(?)
Still think I would prefer using the "Transfer-Encoding: chunked" but maybe you could use the blob.size() function to set the Content-length

[kkfin]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

By the way now Facebook did prove how dangerous OAuth 2.0 really and in fact hole concept is. Little mistakes in code (yes just Facebook but sure no other) and we do not need id or key to get access token for others data. And when we get one we get all others.

[Steve Workings]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

Thanks some more. I've tried another 100 iterations and combinations and read through several hundred StackOverflow threads based on my search.

Transfer-Encoding: chunked seems to be a sure way to generate a "bad request".

PUT generates a 404.

I tried to buy support from Alpha on this but cannot get support for a 3rd party API.

And I cannot even figure out where to buy support for the Google API.

My biggest customer is increasingly unhappy about this. It should be a simple upload to Google storage. But apparently it's not.

[jgrannis]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

Ok, so 400 "bad request" seems normal if the server is pretty much insisting on a correct Content-length so that it can determine the end of the HTTP request.
Did you try going back to not using Transfer-Encoding: chunked and instead using Content-length with the result of blob.size()?

[kkfin]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

Is Nodejs yet an option?. There seems to be some npm alternatives to use. So basically you just have to pass xbasic filename variable to nodeservice(few lines of javascript) which starts then the actual Nodejs App. In Nodejs App you can directly use code what you find from web.

[kkfin]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

Ok, so 400 "bad request" seems normal if the server is pretty much insisting on a correct Content-length so that it can determine the end of the HTTP request.
Did you try going back to not using Transfer-Encoding: chunked and instead using Content-length with the result of blob.size()?

Please read the Lennys post #5 There is no need to use Content-Length.

[jgrannis]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

Ah, yes. I missed the end that said "If you simply omit that header, http_fetch() will automatically calculate the correct value for you."
I had read it meaning that it it should be calculated dynamically after the encoding.

Great. Then maybe the server is missing some information about the content encoding and need to add the header:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: BASE64

EDIT: seems like to documentation for http_fetch should indicate "If you simply omit that header, http_fetch() will automatically calculate the correct value for you." because normally we are allowed to add headers and it is not abnormal to omit Content-length and replace it with Transfer-Encoding: chunked. So it seems that if only Transfer-Encoding: chunked is added and Content-length is omitted but then automatically added and then we send both headers, the server can consider it an improperly formed request.

[jgrannis]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

I think I had not realized at all that http_fetch might be Alpha Software's implement of the "Fetch standard".
If so, and I now imagine it is, there might be quite a bit of reading to do at the link below to understand Fetch...

https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/

Seems like which headers are allowed and which are not is explained there ...although not very easy to understand.

[Lenny Forziati]

Re: http_fetch with image upload

I think I had not realized at all that http_fetch might be Alpha Software's implement of the "Fetch standard".
If so, and I now imagine it is, there might be quite a bit of reading to do at the link below to understand Fetch...

https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/

Seems like which headers are allowed and which are not is explained there ...although not very easy to understand.

The Xbasic http_fetch() function predates the "Fetch standard" by about a decade and is in no way intended to an implementation of that document.