Skip to content

Bzip3 #673

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Bzip3 #673

wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

armijnhemel
Copy link
Collaborator

@armijnhemel armijnhemel commented May 15, 2023

This PR adds some support for the bzip3 format. It is limited to structural checks (header and chunks) but no decompression is done.

@armijnhemel
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Hm. seems something went wrong when pushing.

@armijnhemel armijnhemel requested a review from generalmimon May 12, 2025 12:28
size: len_compressed
instances:
is_last:
value: len_uncompressed < _root.header.block_size
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you sure about this? Can you back it up with a link to https://github.com/kspalaiologos/bzip3 as a source, perhaps?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The bzip3 doesn't take concatenated files into account but will just try to continue. For my particular use case (where I need to be able to carve) it is actually important. So no, it isn't in the specification.

Copy link
Member

@generalmimon generalmimon May 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you please explain this in a doc somewhere why this .ksy spec does this while the reference implementation does not? Because it's confusing at least.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, it is a bit confusing, and it also doesn't work in all cases (so I need to work a bit more on expanding the specification). Would you prefer if I would first add additional block parsing?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants