Error message when trying to "Extract here"

1

Hi all,
Is it my system (UB 24.04), or is there some kind of bug with extracting compressed archives using File Roller (right click > “Extract Here”)?

extract

TIA

2

hmm - maybe its specific with your archive.

Testing here - right clicking and choosing extract here works successfully.

If you open the archive in file-roller itself and extract the files, does that work?

3

Thanks for responding, @fossfreedom!
Until I tried to extract the Balena Etcher archive, and this morning the Kripton theme archive, it seemed to work normally. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

Same result with File Roller itself.

In fact, the message looks like there is a problem. However, the extraction is correct.
No problem with:

sudo unzip

End of terminal return:

  inflating: balenaEtcher-linux-x64/balena-etcher  
finishing deferred symbolic links:
  balenaEtcher-linux-x64/balenaEtcher -> /home/runner/work/etcher/etcher/out/balenaEtcher-linux-x64/balena-etcher
4

Well sudo unzip will unzip a file as root and the permissions of the extracted archive will be root.

Check that the folder you are extracting to you have permissions to write to.

5

Shame on me, I don’t need sudo to unzip… :mask:
I do my testing in a directory I’ve created on the desktop, so I have write permissions.

And you’re right, the error does only occur with certain specific archives.

There’s actually a difference between the results of the two methods: “Unzip” (right pane) has one more file than “File Roller” (left pane) — what’s the point of this broken link?

difference
difference950×559 358 KB

But both extractions are complete, so it doesn’t matter, that’s just a detail.

6

I found both explanations thanks to Engrampa, more talkative than File Roller:

ERROR: Dangerous link path was ignored: balenaEtcher-linux-x64/balenaEtcher : /home/runner/work/etcher/etcher/out/balenaEtcher-linux-x64/balena-etcher

Sorry for the fake problem… :confused:

7

Think it is definitely worth raising on the balenaetcher issue tracker. Does sound like their archive needs a tweak or two.

8

Unfortunately, that’s not all: I haven’t checked very recently, but the AppImage no longer worked, the .deb archive was missing a dependency that UB 24.04 can’t satisfy and you had to change the permissions on the ‘chrome-sandbox’ file in the .zip archive.
Too bad.

9

Sadly thats really a flaw with the appimage itself. A proper container based solution should only have a minimal dependency on the host it is running on.

And if the deb doesnt work then it really needs reworking to resolve the dependency issue.