EXT packer#709
Open
paulnoalhyt wants to merge 4 commits into
Open
Conversation
Member
|
Before I get a chance to review this, how does it compare to these other components that Albert worked on? Also, does it happen to address concerns I raised a long time ago, when the EXT unpacking components were introduced? Note that this would close #529. |
Collaborator
Author
|
@rbs-jacob, mentioned some of this in the PR description but can elaborate a bit more.
|
whyitfor
reviewed
Feb 27, 2026
Comment on lines
+166
to
171
| # a "lost+found" directory might be created when flushed to disk, but might also happen to be present in the filesystem, so ignore it: | ||
| if "lost+found" in old_files: | ||
| old_files.remove("lost+found") | ||
| if "lost+found" in new_files: | ||
| new_files.remove("lost+found") | ||
| assert len(old_files) == len(new_files) and set(old_files) == set( |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This seems suspect? I don't think we want our packer to introduce files like this. Are we sure this is needed?
rbs-jacob
requested changes
Apr 15, 2026
| "-h", | ||
| temp_path, | ||
| stdout=asyncio.subprocess.PIPE, | ||
| stderr=asyncio.subprocess.DEVNULL, |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably capture stderr to attach to an exception if this fails.
Comment on lines
+205
to
+226
| if ext_view.blocks_per_group: | ||
| cmd.extend(["-g", str(ext_view.blocks_per_group)]) | ||
| if ext_view.inode_size: | ||
| cmd.extend(["-I", str(ext_view.inode_size)]) | ||
| if ext_view.number_of_inodes: | ||
| cmd.extend(["-N", str(ext_view.number_of_inodes)]) | ||
| if ext_view.reserved_block_count and ext_view.block_count > 0: | ||
| percentage = round(ext_view.reserved_block_count / ext_view.block_count * 100) | ||
| cmd.extend(["-m", str(percentage)]) | ||
| if ext_view.creator_os: | ||
| cmd.extend(["-o", ext_view.creator_os]) | ||
| if ext_view.filesystem_features: | ||
| features = "none," + ext_view.filesystem_features.replace(" ", ",") | ||
| cmd.extend(["-O", features]) | ||
| if ext_view.filesystem_revision: | ||
| cmd.extend(["-r", str(ext_view.filesystem_revision)]) | ||
| if ext_view.volume_label: | ||
| cmd.extend(["-L", ext_view.volume_label]) | ||
| if ext_view.last_mounted_directory: | ||
| cmd.extend(["-M", ext_view.last_mounted_directory]) | ||
| if ext_view.uuid: | ||
| cmd.extend(["-U", ext_view.uuid]) |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If any of these values are zero, they will not be set. These checks should probably be explicit about confirming is not None.
Comment on lines
+245
to
+251
| for item in os.listdir(temp_dir): | ||
| src = os.path.join(temp_dir, item) | ||
| dst = os.path.join(str(extract_dir), item) | ||
| if os.path.isdir(src): | ||
| shutil.copytree(src, dst, symlinks=True) | ||
| else: | ||
| shutil.copy2(src, dst) |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do this instead of extracting directly to the extract dir?
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
One sentence summary of this PR (This should go in the CHANGELOG!)
Add EXT packer, analyzer and tests.
Link to Related Issue(s)
#529
Please describe the changes in your request.
ExtAnalyzerthat uses thedumpe2fscommand to determine all the EXT attributes.ExtPackerthat uses themke2fscommand and the analysis from theExtAnalyzerto create an EXT2/3/4 filesystem without having to mount anything or use loop devices.FilesystemPackUnpackVerifyPatternand a round trip test to make sure attributes are preserved_validate_folder_equalitymethod inpytest_ofrak/src/pytest_ofrak/patterns/pack_unpack_filesystem.pybecause linux will sometimes create alost+founddirectory when extracting the filesystem. But it could also be present in the original filesystem. So I just removed that from the equality comparison.Compared to #558 PR, this merge request is more compact and less complex (no need to write a debugfs script, etc).
Anyone you think should look at this, specifically?
No