Sasa Vilic <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yesterday, I reconstructed the data from the last mail and it is obvious > > that > > the checksum is not "correct". > > I patched gtar now to print out debug information and I hope that this > information could help in further investigation. > > The tar_checksum (list.c) function did return HEADER_SUCCESS and following > checksum inside tar_checksum have been computed: > > * unsigned_sum: 55552 > * signed_sum: 0 > * parsed_sum/recorded_sum: 0. > > Since tar_checksum returns HEADER_SUCCESS, the function > check_compressed_archive (buffer.c) will return ct_tar (plain tar file) as > detected type and will not try look into magic number to detect compression > algorithm, which is exactly the issue here.
Well, the location that would hold the checksum starts with a null byte, so it cannot be a checksum field. Jörg -- EMail:[email protected] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [email protected] (uni) [email protected] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
