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

Re: RAR under linux: any alternative?

On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 16:15 -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> 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.

That's why you include a checksums file with the archive set and/or list
the sums at the point of origin (web site, FTP site, etc).

> > 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.

I don't know, maybe I'm just dense or something, but explain to me why
you would WANT to put that information in the archive itself? If an
archive is CORRUPTED (which is why we're distributing the sums and the
PARs in the first place), what good will it be that the sums and
recovery info are IN the file? It's ALREADY corrupt, so what makes you
think the recovery data wouldn't be corrupt right along with it?!

Or am I just missing something painfully obvious here?

Alex Malinovich
Support Free Software, delete your Windows partition TODAY!
Encrypted mail preferred. You can get my public key from any of the
pgp.net keyservers. Key ID: A6D24837

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: