Files
DarkRoom/.gitea
dtourolleandClaude Opus 5 606f85df34
🐳 Android image / Build and push (push) Successful in 2s
Build and test / android-image (push) Successful in 3s
Build and test / Desktop (Linux) (push) Failing after 1h12m2s
Build and test / Layer separation (push) Successful in 36s
Traceability / Requirement traces (push) Failing after 31s
Build and test / Android (aarch64) (push) Failing after 36m17s
Send the LFS object endpoint one Authorization header, not two
The model fetch has been failing on every run with

  LFS: Client error: .../info/lfs/objects/0672d7a7...

which reads like a rejected credential and is not one. The object is on
the server and downloads fine; what fails is the shape of the request.

`git lfs pull` makes two calls. The first, to `/info/lfs/objects/batch`,
succeeds -- and Gitea answers it with a short-lived `Bearer` JWT scoped
to that one object, for git-lfs to use on the second. git-lfs sends that
JWT *and* the `Authorization` header this step had installed in git
config, and two `Authorization` headers is a 400 from Gitea. Hence a
client error on the object one step after the batch call it just made
successfully, which is what made this look like an auth problem rather
than a duplication.

Confirmed directly against the server: the JWT alone on that URL is a
200, the JWT plus any second `Authorization` is a 400, and a lone token
header that is merely wrong is a 401 -- so the scheme was never the
issue. `lfs: true` on the checkout fails the same way and for the same
reason, because actions/checkout persists a header of its own; the
comment here blaming a credential the endpoint would not accept was
wrong on both counts.

So the headers are stripped -- checkout's included, since nothing later
in either job talks to the remote -- and the token is handed to git-lfs
as an ordinary credential instead. It authenticates the batch call and
leaves the per-object JWT alone.

This is what fails the Android job today: the build script sees a
133-byte pointer and panics by design, which is the message it is
supposed to give and the one nobody could act on.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-25 22:55:26 +02:00
..