is there any way to check the final size of a specific file after compression in a squashfs filesystem?
I'm looking through mksquashfs/unsquashfs command line options but I can't find anything.
Using the -info option in mksquashfs only prints the size before the compression.
Thanks
This isn't feasible to do with much granularity, because compression is done at block level, not file level.
A file may be marked at starting 50kb into the size of the buffer created by decompressing block 50, and continuing to end 50 bytes into the decompressed block 52 (ignoring fragments here, which are a separate concern) -- but that doesn't let you map back to the position inside the compressed copy of block-50 where that file starts. (You can easily determine the compression ratio for block 51, but you can't easily figure out the ratios for the parts of the file contained in 50 and 52 in our example, because they're shared with other contents).
So the information isn't exposed because it isn't easily available. This actually makes storage of numerous (similar) small files significantly more efficient, because a single compression context is used for all of them (and decompressing a block to retrieve one file may mean that you've got files next to it already decompressed in memory)... but without potentially-unfounded assumptions (such as assuming that all contents within a block share that block's average ratio) it doesn't help with trying to backtrace how well each individual item compressed, because the items aren't compressed individually in the first place.
Related
I use BitTorrent and sometimes encounter files that do not have seed(missing pieces).
At that time, we sometimes force the file transfer to end and try to open the incompleted files (for example, an image file).
If we are lucky, may be able to see the downloaded image even if some parts are lost.
I would like to artificially reproduce this situation, and here's how I tried:
1) spliting a bmp image file of about 1 megabyte into 16 kilobytes by the Linux split command,
2) and then make just one of the divided files 0 kilobytes.
3) after that, rejoin all the files with the cat command.
However, in this case, unlike the torrent's "lost pieces" situation, the file becomes completely corrupt and can not be read.
Theoretically it does not seem like anything special, but what's wrong? And how can I achieve what I want?
I would appreciate your help.
Use dd:
dd if=/dev/zero of=image.jpg bs=1 conv=notrunc seek=X count=Y
being X the offset in the file you want to erase and Y the number of bytes.
About the corruption, it depends on the type of file, the piece you are losing and the program you are using to read it.
For instance, JPG files use a variable bit-length encoding, meaning that just losing one bit may corrupt all the file from that point on. But just for that, there can be resyncronization points where the bitstream is reset, so from that point on, the file will look ok. But those resync points are optional when writing the file, and not every reader honor them in case of corruption...
And anyway, losing part of the headers will make the file totally unreadable.
I'm currently working on one Node.js project. I want to have an ability to read, modify and write ZIP file without saving it into FS (we receive it by TCP and send it back after modifications were made), and so far it looks like possible bocause of simple ZIP file structure. Currently I refer to this documentation.
So ZIP file has simple structure:
File header 1
File data 1
File data descriptor 1
File header 2
File data 2
File data descriptor 2
...
[other not important yet]
First we need to read file header, which contains field compressed size, and it could be the perfect way to read file data 1 by it's length. But it's actually not. This field may contain '0' or '0xFFFFFFFF', and those values don't describe its actual length. In that case we have to read file data without information about it's length. But how?..
Compression/Decopression algorithm descriptions looks pretty complex to me, and I plan to use ZLIB for compression itself anyway. So if something useful described there, then I missed the point.
Can someone explain the proper way to read those files?
P.S. Please avoid suggesting npm modules. I do not want to only solve the problem, but also to understand how things work.
Note - I'm assuming you want to read and process the zip file as
it comes off the socket, rather than reading the complete zip file into
memory before processing. Both options are valid.
I'd initially ignore the use cases where the compressed size has a value of '0' or '0xFFFFFFFF'. The former is only present in zip files created in streaming mode, the latter for zip files larger than 4Gig.
Dealing with them adds a lot of complexity - you can add support for them later, if necessary. Whether you ever need to support the 0/0xFFFFFFFF use cases depends on the nature of the zip files you intend to process.
When the compression method is deflated (8), use zlib for compression/decompression. You also need to support compression method stored (0). It gets used for very small files where compression isn't appropriate.
I have a large binary file (~ GB size) generated from a Fortran 90 program. I want to modify something in the head part of the file. The structure of the file is very complicated and contains many different variables, which I want to avoid going into. After reading and re-writing the head, is it possible to "copy and paste" the reminder of the file without knowing its detailed structure? Or even better, can I avoid re-writing the whole file altogether and just make changes on the original file? (Not sure if it matters, but the length of the header will be changed.)
Since you are changing the length of the header, I think that you have to write a new, revised file. You could avoid having to "understand" the records after the header by opening the file with stream access and just reading bytes (or perhaps four byte words if the file is a multiple of four bytes) until you reach EOF and copying them to the new file. But if the file was originally created as sequential access and you want to access it that way in the future, you will have to handle the record length information for the header record(s), including altering the value(s) to be consistent with the changed the length of the record(s). This record length information is typically a four-byte integer at beginning and end of each record, but it depends on the compiler.
i've a single gzip compressed file (100GB uncompressed 40GB compressed). Now i would like to modify some bytes / ranges of bytes - i DO NOT want to change the files size.
For example
Bytes 8 + 10 and Bytes 5000 - 40000
is this possible without recompressing the whole file?
Stefan
Whether you want to change the file sizes makes no difference (since the resulting gzip isn't laid out according to the original file sizes anyway), but if you split the compressed file into parts so that the parts you want to modify are in isolated chunks, and use a multiple-file compression method instead of the single-file gzip method, you could update just the changed files without decompressing and compressing the entire file.
In your example:
bytes1-7.bin \
bytes8-10.bin \ bytes.zip
bytes11-4999.bin /
bytes5000-40000.bin /
Then you could update bytes8-10.bin and bytes5000-40000.bin but not the other two. But whether this will take less time is dubious.
In a word, no. It would be necessary to replace one or more deflate blocks with new blocks with exactly the same total number of bits, but with different contents. If the new data is less compressible with deflate, this becomes impossible. Even if it is more compressible, it would require a lot of bit twiddling by hand to try to get the bits to match. And it still might not be possible.
The man page for gzip says "If you wish to create a single archive file with multiple members so that members can later be extracted independently, use an archiver such as tar or zip." I believe that means that gzip compression continues through the files, therefore is context-sensitive, and therefore will not permit what you want.
Either decompress/patch/recompress, or switch to a different representation of your data (perhaps an uncompressed tar or zip of individually compressed files, so you only have to decompress/recompress the one you want to change.) The latter will not store your data as compactly, in general, but that's the tradeoff you have to make.
I have a binary file that I need to insert a header at the beginning of. I was thinking of opening a new file, writing the header data, and then copying the data from the binary file to this new file. Since the binary file is about 1 megabyte, are there any dangers to making this file using fwrite? One specific concern would be something like unintentionally overwriting data, similar to what happens if using gets and the input is longer than the buffer.
There's no risk. Allocate a buffer of a given size, read that many bytes into it from the source file, write the buffer back out to the destination file. The operations (file read / file write) all take a maximum number of bytes so as long as your buffer is the size you claim it is, it won't be overrun.
Also, the approach you describe is pretty much the only way to do it. I've never heard of a filesystem that has an "insert these bytes at the beginning of this file" operation.