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. [1]

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. [2]

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?

Pino Toscano

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Libguestfs mailing list

Reply via email to