Healthcheck fails in Docker with default .filebrowser.json: curl: (3) URL rejected: Bad hostname about filebrowser HOT 22 CLOSED

I don't understand what the fix is here. I have a default filebrowser installation and keeps giving me this healtcheck error too:

curl: (3) URL rejected: Bad hostname

1. Execute an interactive shell inside the container

   docker exec -it -u root [CONTAINER_NAME] ash

2. Install nano (or another editor of your choice):

   apk add --no-cache nano

3. Edit healthcheck.sh:

   nano healthcheck.sh

4. Add the -r or --raw-output flag to the jq command:
   Change ADDRESS=${FB_ADDRESS:-$(jq .address /.filebrowser.json)} to ADDRESS=${FB_ADDRESS:-$(jq -r .address /.filebrowser.json)}

from filebrowser.

@mapxn and future readers, the problem has been identidied and fixed (see #3087), no need to spam report. Either wait for the next release, or use one of the optiones above to temporarily fix it yourself.

from filebrowser.

Guess this wont work for me, as it repulls the image in portainer when i change my compose to run as root (otherwise i cant edit healtcheck). I need a new docker image build :-(

I fixed mine by doing a cat to the healthcheck (docker exec -it filebrowser cat healthcheck.sh) to get its content. Made a copy outside of the container since you have the /srv mounted to some place inside the machine, keeping the same name. Edited the script to add the -r flag and copied back the edited file, replacing the old one.

Here's a one line command as a temp fix:

docker exec -it [CONTAINER_NAME] sed -i 's/\(jq .address \/.filebrowser\.json\)/\1 -r/' healthcheck.sh

from filebrowser.

If fixing a typo that makes the default docker image unusable takes more than two weeks, that doesn't really instill confidence in the project.

from filebrowser.

FYI, the fix has been merged (#3130), so just wait for the next release 😁

from filebrowser.

@jinks If you think you can do better, why don't you fork this project and maintain it better instead. Don't forget that this project is maintained by unpaid volunteers with their own lives, and no obligations to any of us.

from filebrowser.

@Tuumke You don't have to run the container as root. If you are using Portainer, you can execute a shell from the webui (select /bin/ash), and there you can specify the user, type root inside:

PS. Fixed my comment above

from filebrowser.

Needs to get merged first.

from filebrowser.

same here:

from filebrowser.

Ah, you're correct. The double quotes are introduced by executing jq without the -r (--raw-output) flag. I didn't realize there was already logic in healthcheck.sh intended to fallback to "localhost".

Not sure why yours wasn't falling back to localhost though. Adding the -r flag is all I needed.

from filebrowser.

Ah, you're correct. The double quotes are introduced by executing jq without the -r (--raw-output) flag. I didn't realize there was already logic in healthcheck.sh intended to fallback to "localhost".

Not sure why yours wasn't falling back to localhost though. Adding the -r flag is all I needed.

Oh yes, you're right. Only -r is needed. Just tested on a fresh container and it works fine.

from filebrowser.

I don't understand what the fix is here. I have a default filebrowser installation and keeps giving me this healtcheck error too:

curl: (3) URL rejected: Bad hostname

from filebrowser.

I don't understand what the fix is here. I have a default filebrowser installation and keeps giving me this healtcheck error too:

curl: (3) URL rejected: Bad hostname

Were you able to inspect the pull request? That might make it clear. There's a healthcheck.sh script inside the container that needs to be changed to incorporate the mentioned -r parameter.

from filebrowser.

I don't understand what the fix is here. I have a default filebrowser installation and keeps giving me this healtcheck error too:
curl: (3) URL rejected: Bad hostname

1. Execute an interactive shell inside the container
   ```shell
   docker exec -it [CONTAINER_NAME] ash
   ```

2. Install nano (or another editor of your choice):
   ```shell
   apk add --no-cache nano
   ```

3. Edit `healthcheck.sh`:
   ```shell
   nano healthcheck.sh
   ```

4. Add the `-r` or `--raw-output` flag to the jq command:
   Change `ADDRESS=${FB_ADDRESS:-$(jq .address /.filebrowser.json)}` to `ADDRESS=${FB_ADDRESS:-$(jq -r .address /.filebrowser.json)}`

Guess this wont work for me, as it repulls the image in portainer when i change my compose to run as root (otherwise i cant edit healtcheck). I need a new docker image build :-(

from filebrowser.

Have the same issue.

from filebrowser.

Guess this wont work for me, as it repulls the image in portainer when i change my compose to run as root (otherwise i cant edit healtcheck). I need a new docker image build :-(

I fixed mine by doing a cat to the healthcheck (docker exec -it filebrowser cat healthcheck.sh) to get its content. Made a copy outside of the container since you have the /srv mounted to some place inside the machine, keeping the same name. Edited the script to add the -r flag and copied back the edited file, replacing the old one.

Here's a one line command as a temp fix:

docker exec -it [CONTAINER_NAME] sed -i 's/\(jq .address \/.filebrowser\.json\)/\1 -r/' healthcheck.sh

Thanks for your workaround!

If your container does not run as root, just add "-u root".

docker exec -it -u root [CONTAINER_NAME] sed -i 's/\(jq .address \/.filebrowser\.json\)/\1 -r/' healthcheck.sh

from filebrowser.

healthechk.sh shoudl be changed to:

#!/bin/sh PORT=${FB_PORT:-$(jq -r .port /.filebrowser.json)} ADDRESS=${FB_ADDRESS:-$(jq -r .address /.filebrowser.json)} ADDRESS=${ADDRESS:-localhost} curl -f http://$ADDRESS:$PORT/health || exit 1

-r needs to be added in order to give just the strings and not "strings", i.e. the address is
http://filebrowser:431/health
and not
http://"filebrowser":431/health

from filebrowser.

@lustrant Already has been (see #3087)

from filebrowser.

But when can we see this fixed in the docker image? :O
Been a while now, surely this is pushed easy into a new image?

from filebrowser.

@Guiorgy Because I don't care enough to maintain a project long-term.

The question remains, why pushing a 2-letter fix to Docker Hub remains such a chore. It's not even part of the core code. Unless there is something seriously wrong with the release process, I would imagine pushing the fix to Docker should be less work than this thread has already consumed.

from filebrowser.

@jinks As I said, they have their lives, maybe they have something more urgent going on. And it's not like the container is completely broken, or hard to manually workaround.

from filebrowser.

I'm running into this issue as well, and my workaround is to add an environment variable FB_ADDRESS: 0.0.0.0 so that the command jq .address /.filebrowser.json doesn't work

from filebrowser.