File Recycler doesn't collect deleted files anymore
I'm talking about the folder named
_recycler_, as referenced in this blogpost:
In 6.2 there are no more deleted files moved to this folder, but it still has its own folder icon and scheduler task.
It was still working in TYPO3 4.7 (no FAL, of course), which I was just able to confirm in my local XAMPP installations.
[BUGFIX] File Recycler collect deleted files again
Check if a recycler folder exists along the path from the storage root
to the file. If a matching folder is found move the file or folder to be
deleted to the closest recycler folder instead of immediately removing
them from the local filesystem.
Reviewed-by: Morton Jonuschat <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Tested-by: Morton Jonuschat <email@example.com>
Reviewed-by: Benni Mack <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Tested-by: Benni Mack <email@example.com>
#15 Updated by Clemens Riccabona over 4 years ago
Is there any chance to get this into 6.2, which is a LTS officially supported till 3/2017, which is in fact a year from now!?
beside that, it is just ridiculous: in 6.2 we have got the cool new feature of cleaning recycler automagically via taskscheduler.
but guess what: recycler not been filled anyway.
really a funfact! ;)
#17 Updated by Clemens Riccabona over 4 years ago
Florian Seirer wrote:
You could just apply the patch to 6.2.19 yourself.
I did the same, and it worked.
Thanks for confirming, that the patch just works for 6.2 too!
Essentially I do not like (read: hate) to change the core myself everytime when there is a new version published ...
But better than the response: update to 7 LTS, the bug is gone there ... (also an advice I get sometimes when reporting bugs ...)
#18 Updated by Florian Seirer over 4 years ago
Now that it works again I found out that files can't be deleted if there is already another file with the same name in the recycler folder.
PHP Fatal error: Class 'DateTimeImmutable' not found in /var/www/typo3/typo3-6.2.21/typo3/sysext/core/Classes/Resource/Driver/LocalDriver.php on line 827
Should i create a new issue for this?