Thoughts? Should I just pick a number and send a patch? On Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 09:46 enh <[email protected]> wrote:
> the only other idea i've had since: use perl or python to implement #4 > inline. but there's no perl or python on Android devices, and there's > no way that i know of to SEEK_HOLE/SEEK_DATA in awk. so that seems > like a non-starter. > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 5:58 PM enh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I shot myself in the foot with my tar test that checks both st_size and > st_blocks (via stat(1)). You may remember that I had to add a "don't run > these tests on a system with SELinux xattrs" hack to the du tests. > Basically, any test of st_blocks will be broken because of SELinux. > > > > Unlike the du tests, I don't want to disable this tar sparse test unless > I have to. But I don't have any non-terrible options. > > > > 1. Disable the test for SELinux. > > > > 2. Use shell arithmetic to allow some fudge. > > > > 3. Use setxattr to try to ensure that we're always using extra space, > but then we need to work around failures on file systems without xattrs, > and how much is enough, and... > > > > 4. Invent a new tool that actually dumps a map of where the holes are in > a file. Unfortunately I'm not aware of any existing tool we could use, so > then the test relies on toybox already being installed. > > > > 5. Use find -printf %S but because that's just using st_blocks behind > the scenes, we'd need a fudge factor only now it would be a float instead > of an int, which doesn't seem like an improvement. > > > > I haven't been able to come up with anything else, and I don't like any > of those options, so ... anyone have a better idea? > > > > If not, 1 or 2 seem like the least awful. Let me know which you prefer, > if you don't have a good solution I haven't thought of... >
_______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
