[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RAR under linux: any alternative?

Alex Malinovich wrote:
> The same way that RAR does. They tell you whether that discreet part of
> the archive is corrupted or not. If it is corrupted it's just as useless
> whether it's a RAR archive or any other type of archive.

    Bzt, try again.  I asked "against what".  You create the archives and
they're sitting there on the disc.  You use whatever tool you want and it
spits out a value.  Against what do you check that value?  There is no
reference to check against.  RAR, on the other hand, computes the value for
the files inside the archive and stores that value *in the archive itself*.
Later when you ask it to check the validity of the archive it can reference
the stored value.

> Sorry, but I'm just not seeing it. If RAR had some recovery features
> along the lines of PAR, I might be more impressed.

    Be impressed.  Why do you think one of the reasons unrar-free can't deal
with >= 3.00 rar files?  From RAR's 3.0 notes:

9. Added support of so called recovery volumes (.rev files), which can be used
to reconstruct missing files in a volume set. One .rev file allows to
reconstruct one missing RAR volume, for example, 5 .rev files are able to
reconstruct any 5 volumes.

> But seeing as how PAR
> works with any type of a multi-part archive I'm just not seeing any
> particular strength to using RAR.

    Combine the above.  Again, reference against what?  That information needs
to be created and stored at the time of creation.  Having an md5sum 3 months
later with nothing to check it against is useless.

         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
       PGP Key: 8B6E99C5       | main connection to the switchboard of souls.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: