On Saturday, 8 October 2016 18:27:21 CEST Matteo Cafasso wrote: > Patch ready for merging. > > v4: > > - check return code of tsk_fs_attr_walk > - pass TSK_FS_FILE_WALK_FLAG_NOSPARSE as additional flag to > tsk_fs_attr_walk > > After discussing with TSK authors the behaviour is clear. 
Thanks, this improves the situation a bit. > In case of COMPRESSED blocks, the callback will be called for all the > attributes no matter whether they are on disk or not (sparse). In > such cases, the block address will be 0.  Note that the API docs say: For compressed and sparse attributes, the address *may* be zero. (emphasis is mine) My concern is that, if the address in such cases is "unspecified", then the comparisons in "attrwalk_callback" are done against a random/unitialized value (which would be bad). Also, if the block address would be zero, what's the point of having it among the blocks tsk_fs_attr_walk() iterates over? Thanks, -- Pino Toscano
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Libguestfs mailing list Libguestfs@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs