Closed (outdated)
Project:
Content Access
Version:
6.x-1.2
Component:
Miscellaneous
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Bug report
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
27 Jan 2011 at 17:11 UTC
Updated:
24 May 2020 at 04:09 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent, Most recent file
Comments
Comment #1
skujan commentedAs a follow-up, I am able to get Content Access to work in another site I have. Could there be a conflict with another module? Why would it work in one site and not another?
Comment #2
skujan commentedLooks like the Content Permissions module conflicts with Content Access. You can only use one or the other.
Comment #3
awasson commentedThis is a bit late but, no it doesn't conflict with Content Permissions or at least not CCK Content Permissions.
The problem I ran into today is that it requires that you rebuild your permissions before it works and it doesn't always prompt you to do so.
I tried it on a site I'm building but it didn't work... I just wanted one type of content unavailable for Anonymous roles. It didn't work so I poured through the issues queue and didn't find a solution. Then I added it to a vanilla install of D6 that I have (with CCK Content Permissions), installed the module and created my content type. I was prompted to rebuild my permissions. That prompted me to go back to the other site and rebuild my permissions.
After rebuilding my permissions (my-site/admin/content/node-settings) I edited and saved my content type one more time and voila, it works as advertised : )
I hope that helps.
Andrew
PS: Maybe an enhancement for the module would be a link to rebuild the permissions right from a Content Access administration page.
Comment #4
squarecandy commentedThanks awasson!!! that was driving me nuts.
Seems like one of two improvements would be great improvements would be great here:
1) Upon submitting / saving changes on an access control tab, in addition to the "your changes have been saved" message, server a warning "you may need to rebuild your permissions before these changes will take effect." with a link to admin/content/node-settings
2) skip the warning and just call node_access_rebuild upon submitting any form this module serves.
The second one is a more heavy-handed approach, but more secure/foolproof. This is a privacy-focused module after all... Seems like if a site admin realizes that they need to take away permissions from Anonymous users for a certain node type that there's probably a good reason and that they would want the change to take effect immediately, right?
Comment #5
squarecandy commentedI dug in a little deeper here...
I know this module is not under active development, but there are a lot of people using this, and skujan and I can't be the only ones getting confused by this. The module is serving a message "Permissions have been successfully rebuilt for content type..." but it just doesn't seem to be true most of the time... If you go to the admin/content/node-type/TYPE/access page and disable Anonymous user view access for a particular content type, anonymous users can still view it until you rebuild the node access permissions.
Perhaps there's a better solution, but for now, here's a patch that that eliminates the false "success" message and turns on the node_access_needs_rebuild flag that serves a link to where you can rebuild.
Comment #6
good_man commentedIt does show up a big red alert to rebuild the permissions after enabling it, guess nobody actually see it :)
IMO we should stick to option 1, display the warning again and let the user do that.
@squarecandy: Why the content_access_get_acl_id() function in the patch?
Comment #7
awasson commentedIt sometimes shows up in a big red alert but not always and that is the reason this was an issue for me. See post #3.
Comment #8
good_man commentedI can't reproduce, if you didn't rebuild right away & assigned some grants (changed a content type access settings), it'll rebuild too, so it's working as designed. Any clear steps to reproduce??
Comment #9
dkingofpa commentedPeople can also enable the module via Drush and so don't see that message.
Comment #10
gisle