Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 14:23:24 -0400 From: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 'file' Command Giving False Positives Message-ID: <44r5jln3oj.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> In-Reply-To: <20100702173504.c53738b2.freebsd@edvax.de> (Polytropon's message of "Fri, 2 Jul 2010 17:35:04 %2B0200") References: <4C2DF07F.1020509@tundraware.com> <44630xq527.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> <20100702173504.c53738b2.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> writes: > On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 11:25:20 -0400, Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org> wrote: >> Why is it incorrect? "LZ" as the first two bytes in a file is (unless >> my memory is badly mistaken) exactly what the old command.com looked for >> as the flag of an executable. > > If I ask *my* memory, it tells me that what you mean is "MZ". As > far as I remember, those are the initials of a programmer involved > with the creation of the DOS binary executable format. :-) Apparently, your memory is better than mine, because that was indeed what I was thinking of. Which leads to the question of why magic(5) lists LZ as representing "MS-DOS executable (built-in)". I'd be hesitant to change that unless we knew for sure it was wrong. Even if it _is_ wrong, the "problem" still remains for "MZ" at least: Any file starting with those letters is going to be identified as an MS-DOS executable, and there's no clear way to distinguish it from a text file that happens to start with those letters.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44r5jln3oj.fsf>