That will be added.KevC wrote:Excellent stuff.
A cookie output is always handy.
[list=disc]
in language/<lang>/help_bbcode.php
would tell you that the language files are at least from phpBB 3.1.8, because the change was introduced between 3.1.7-pl1 and 3.1.8. 'ACL_M_PM_REPORT'
in phpBB/language/<lang>/acp/permissions_phpbb.php
, because it was introduced after 3.1.6. If it is missing, the language pack is older than 3.1.7.Everything has been added, just I am not sure about the URl. I usedKevC wrote:URL, cookie domain, path, name, secure yes/no
That's usually everything you need to know if there's a cookie issue.
$url = $request->server('SERVER_NAME', '');
Yes, it was something I forgot to remove, sort of debug into the very first stage ot this tool.gn#36 wrote:I am curious why you check for the docs directory? I don't really see why that would be needed.
Done.gn#36 wrote:I would also check for other folders permissions maybe:
/cache
/store
/files
/images/avatars/upload
We are creating a self-alone basic PHP/phpBB/HTML file (without whistles and bells, so to speak) that aims to help the Support Team and generally the phpBB's supporters to catch the potential issues prior to give useles responses to the end-user.John P wrote:Ever saw this System overview
Well, that can be done but is beyond, I think, the scope of this Tool. Once we know that the common.php (english) lies in its right place I guess is enough for the Supporters. But I could be wrong, I am open mind.gn#36 wrote: Regarding the language files, I think the only way to ensure they are complete is to compare the array keys of each file to those of the original. This could be done for all translations, not just for english and thereby also cover outdated language packs, which is quite a common error. Unfortunately, however, this would mean that your script needs an update with every version, so I am not sure that is what you want.
This one is a good idea, I will try and do my best to implement it.gn#36 wrote:A smaller variant than checking all language files could be checking for specific language variables that have changed between versions. For example, the presence of[list=disc]
inlanguage/<lang>/help_bbcode.php
would tell you that the language files are at least from phpBB 3.1.8, because the change was introduced between 3.1.7-pl1 and 3.1.8.
Yes, precisely 3.1.7-rc1 as far as I remember.gn#36 wrote:Consequently, the absence of the above code means that the language files are probably outdated, if the board version otherwise states it is 3.1.8. For 3.1.7, you could check for the presence of language key'ACL_M_PM_REPORT'
inphpBB/language/<lang>/acp/permissions_phpbb.php
, because it was introduced after 3.1.6. If it is missing, the language pack is older than 3.1.7.
All language packs seems to me a an overkilling for this file. The FAQs in the Support Forum are others.gn#36 wrote:Some of these changes you can check on all language packs (e.g. if a variable was added), but not all. Again, this would require an update for each phpBB Version, but at least you wouldn't need to ship a complete set of language files but could rely on checking only a few language keys.
Please expand, interesting.gn#36 wrote:Something that would be very easy to check if you can access the database is whether all languages that are in use in the board are actually present at all. Especially after updates from phpBB 3.0.x, some languages may be missing completely. The same thing applies to styles.
Well, in the case of prosilver I am not checking the version of the style but the version of phpBB the style has been released for.gn#36 wrote:Regarding styles, it would be nice if you checked the versions of all styles, not just prosilver. Custom styles are much more likely to be outdated than prosilver, because they are not automatically updated.
Well, that may simply be because there are international support forums out there. In most cases this error doesn't really break much (unless complete files are missing), so I guess you are right, it is not too important. But really, it is only a loop through the folders in3Di wrote:All language packs seems to me a an overkilling for this file. The FAQs in the Support Forum are others.
language/
instead of a fixed path, so once you have the check implemented for en, it would be easy to expand. Outdated files are, in my opinion, far more likely in translations than in en, because the english files are automatically updated, but the translations are not. So I would either not implement it at all (which would be also ok, because it is not a big problem), or for all languages.
If you update from phpBB 3.0.14 to 3.1.8, you essentially replace all the files. So usually, you wipe the board except for config, store, files, and images/avatars/ and replace everything else by the new phpBB 3.1.x files. Of course, that includes the language files, meaning if the phpBB package is downloaded from phpBB.com, it will only contain english, none of the other language packs are present unless the updater remembered to retrieve new files and upload them as well. However, some of them forget to do so, or upload only a few of the languages. So it would be nice to check if all languages that are used in the users table are actually present. This is even more important for styles, a missing style will usually break the board completely after the update if it is in use. Because of this, we advise users to switch to prosilver before running the update, but some people forget and this would remind them. After all, your tool will be useful both for supporters and for administrators themselves. I think an error message like "missing style abc" would be pretty self explanatory and probably solve the problem by itself for the admin without need of further assistance from the supporter.3Di wrote:Please expand, interesting.gn#36 wrote:Something that would be very easy to check if you can access the database is whether all languages that are in use in the board are actually present at all. Especially after updates from phpBB 3.0.x, some languages may be missing completely. The same thing applies to styles.
That is what I meant. It would be nice to read that file from all installed styles, to see if any of the other styles are outdated. I think that is much more likely than an outdated prosilver because administrators have to remember to update their style. For me that is something I tend to forget myself when updating and unless you remember to ask for a styles version when supporting, it may take time to come by extension errors caused by missing template events. And again it comes down to simply replacing the name "prosilver" with a variable filled in a loop through the styles folder.3Di wrote:Well, in the case of prosilver I am not checking the version of the style but the version of phpBB the style has been released for.
Hello, could you please expand? I guess I am not getting the whole point.HiFiKabin wrote:How about having a BBCode format of the files output?