Re: RAR under linux: any alternative?
On 12:58, Sun 11 Dec 05, Micha Feigin wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 23:35:35 -0300
> Gabriel <nqtnn.gabo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Oliver Lupton wrote:
> >
> > >On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 23:02:50 -0300
> > >Gabriel <nqtnn.gabo@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>Does anyone know a free software alternative to RAR???
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >Use 'tar' combined with gzip or bzip2 to create a .tar.gz or .tar.bz2
> > >man tar, man bzip2 and man gzip for more info :)
> > >
> > >HTH
> > >
> > >-ol
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > yeah, I know that, but I was talking about a program to decompress RAR
> > files... I know I don't really need it, but today a friend sent me a rar
> > file and I needed to tell him to recompress it as zip and send it
> > again... (of course that the first thing he did was talk about the
> > dis-advantages of using GNU/Linux...)
> > So I want it so the next time it happens I won't give anyone the chance
> > to defame GNU =P
> >
>
> aptitude search rar gives for relevant results:
>
> i rar - Archiver for .rar files
> p rar-2.80 - Archiver for .rar files
> p unrar - Unarchiver for .rar files (non-free version)
> p unrar-free - Unarchiver for .rar files
>
> The first three are non-free in the GNU sense but can handle all rar files
> (apt-cache show claims that they are shareware but thats the only reference to
> that issue). rar and unrar are in the non-free section, rar-2.80 is in main
> although it also claims to be shareware. unrar-free is free in the GNU sense,
> but can't handle files from rar >= 3.0.
>
> BTW, if you look at the windows version, it is also shareware and there is no
> free alternative, so there is no ground for linux bashing here since in this
> case your problem is ideological, not technical (there are accessible although
> technically non-free solutions, you just don't want to use them and they are
> equivalent to the windows ones)
>
> >
> > sorry for the bad english
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > *Gabriel Parrondo*
> >
> >
<snip>
The Window Version comes with the nice GUI, where as the
*nix version is only commandline. If one really needs the
GUI you can run it under wine.
Also the Unrar version has limitations, like you can not
archive with it. But then again as mentioned above in this
thread, you can use tar for that.
I agree totally that there is no need for Linux bashing as
the tools are available.
I do see a stigma with rar, in 98.99% of the time a rar file
is used in the archiving of alt.binaries newsgroups. So if
someone mentions a rar file some people assume that it could
be a copyright vilolation. I don't have a problem with that
but I know some people do, if your in a educational setting
you might be hard pressed to have unrar or rar installed.
It's kind of like bittorrent to the avearage person, if
someone uses bittorrent then they must be pirates. I know
some people who think that as well. Of course you probably
know what the MPAA, RIAA think about it as well.
Gnu_Raiz
Reply to: