Robert Millan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 04:36:07PM +0300, Lasse Collin wrote: > > Robert Millan wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 12:11:31PM +0200, Géraud Meyer wrote: > > > > Package: file > > > > Version: 4.21-3 > > > > > > > > Any lzma compressed file I encountered is not recognized as > > > > LZMA compressed data. An example: > > > > > > > > $ cat > test > > > > Text file > > > > $ lzma test > > > > $ file test.lzma > > > > test.lzma: data > > > > > > > > I also tested the version 4.20-3 (found here: > > > > http://archive.daniel-baumann.ch/debian/packages/file/4.20-3/) > > > > that was supposed to be fixed and it gives the same result. > > > > > > I recall they had plans to change the signature. CCing the lzma > > > maintainers, maybe they know something.. > > > > The .lzma format currently in use is too hard to detect without > > looking at the filename suffix. The new .lzma format will fix this > > and a few other problems, but there are no stable tools to handle > > the new format yet. > > Wait, I'm lost now. Which version of the format was my patch > targetted at, the old or the new one? Or there are 3 of them? :-)
There are two formats: the current/old LZMA_Alone format, and the new upcoming .lzma format. Your patch was for the LZMA_Alone format. I tried writing a magic string for "file" two years ago, but the result is quite useless. It's still included in LZMA Utils 4.32.0beta source tarballs in the "extra" directory, but I don't recommend using those magic strings. The new format has magic bytes of "\xFFLZMA\x00" (six bytes) which should be nice for the "file" command. There is a patch for "file" already, which adds support for the -z option too. It's not submitted upstream yet, but I will do it some day. > P.S: don't CC me, I'm the bug submitter Sorry, I'm not familiar with Debian's bug tracking system. I hope I got the addresses better now. -- Lasse Collin | IRC: Larhzu @ IRCnet & Freenode
