From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCA6A607F4 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2022 06:50:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B79681A7C3 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2022 06:49:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 931251A7B2 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2022 06:49:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6150545EDF for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2022 06:49:30 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <9a2434be-52c8-2a91-c7d7-b33ec51d2ad2@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2022 06:49:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:96.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/96.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion , Dominik Csapak References: <20220110112341.2961733-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20220110112341.2961733-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.059 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [zip.rs] Subject: [pbs-devel] applied: [PATCH proxmox v2] fix #3618: proxmox-async: zip: add conditional EFS flag to zip files X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2022 05:50:07 -0000 On 10.01.22 12:23, Dominik Csapak wrote: > this flag marks the file names as 'UTF-8' encoded if they are valid UTF-8. > > By default, encoding of file names in zips are defined as code page 437, > but we save the filenames as bytes (like in linux fs). > > For linux systems this would not be a problem since most tools > simply use the filenames as bytes, but for the zip utility under > windows it's important since NTFS uses UTF-16 for file names. > > For filenames that are valid UTF-8, they are decoded as UTF-8 everywhere > correctly (Linux as UTF-8 bytes, Windows as correct UTF-16 sequence) and > for other filenames with a high bit set, it depends on the OS/Software > what exactly happens. Some cases below: > > * Windows + Built-in/7zip: decoded as CP437 > * Debian + zip: Bytes taken as-is > * Debian + 7z: interpreted as Windows1252, decoded as UTF-8 > > Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak > --- > changes from v1: > * moved to proxmox/proxmox-async from proxmox-backup/pbs-tools > * included bug# in the subject > * removed two spurious newlines > > proxmox-async/src/zip.rs | 22 +++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > applied, thanks! Out of interest, did you benchmark if this changes makes an impact in zip-streaming? I'd think that if, then only for the case with many small files?