fix: estimate progress for solid 7z archives with small data#441
Merged
deepin-bot[bot] merged 1 commit intoJul 22, 2026
Merged
Conversation
![sourcery-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/48477?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
When extracting solid 7z archives with small total data (e.g. 601KB
compressed, 35702 files at 6 bytes each), p7zip 16.02 reports 0% for
all progress updates because the solid block decompresses instantly.
The handleProgress function's `percentage > 0` check caused all 0%
progress lines to be skipped, leaving the progress bar stuck at
"Calculating..." until the process finished and jumped to 100%.
Fix: in the `percentage == 0` branch of handleProgress, when the
progress line contains a filename (detected by `\b\b\b\b` and `-`
separator), parse the file index from 7z's output format
` 0% 1233 - filename` and estimate progress as
`fileIndex * 100 / totalFiles`. Uses `lastIndexOf('%', count)` to
locate the correct `%` associated with the current file entry rather
than the initial `0%` at line start.
Also includes:
- handleLongNameExtract: omit file list for bAllExtract to avoid
ARG_MAX overflow with archives containing tens of thousands of files
- startLongNameProcess: check waitForStarted() return value and clean
up on failure
- onLongNameProcessFinished: apply the same bAllExtract file-list
omission when transitioning from rename to extract phase
Log: fix progress bar stuck at "Calculating..." for solid 7z archives with small data
Bug: https://pms.uniontech.com/bug-view-370449.html
max-lvs
approved these changes
Jul 22, 2026
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: LiHua000, max-lvs The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Contributor
Author
|
/merge |
deepin-bot
Bot
merged commit Jul 22, 2026
0f75be6
into
linuxdeepin:release/eagle
29 of 30 checks passed
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.
When extracting solid 7z archives with small total data (e.g. 601KB compressed, 35702 files at 6 bytes each), p7zip 16.02 reports 0% for all progress updates because the solid block decompresses instantly. The handleProgress function's
percentage > 0check caused all 0% progress lines to be skipped, leaving the progress bar stuck at "Calculating..." until the process finished and jumped to 100%.Fix: in the
percentage == 0branch of handleProgress, when the progress line contains a filename (detected by\b\b\b\band-separator), parse the file index from 7z's output format0% 1233 - filenameand estimate progress asfileIndex * 100 / totalFiles. UseslastIndexOf('%', count)to locate the correct%associated with the current file entry rather than the initial0%at line start.Also includes:
Log: fix progress bar stuck at "Calculating..." for solid 7z archives with small data
Bug: https://pms.uniontech.com/bug-view-370449.html