51

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, mike_rs, you wrote: _> all modern OS zip it is built in from a box, therefore the choice 3rd-party not clear formats for the DATA INTERCHANGE looks at least nonprofessionally I thought that I send given to the PROGRAMMER, instead of a teapot.

52

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> One week ago I launched this inquiry: What archivers use? The author: Lazytech Date: 11.05 18:36 Question: Today to me informed that it is better not to send archives.7z to whom got. The pier, archives Zip is more preferable, because  at all open. Here I also became thoughtful... L> Considering that is a forum of programmers, I was surprised a little with small popularity of such archivers, as ZPAQ and FreeArc. I did not begin to add them in inquiry not to affect purity of experiment. In inquiries normally I do not participate, so did not vote I Use both zip and 7z the First for storage and transfer of a tree of initial texts. I do not know as in 7z, but in zip there is a convenient functional - to update. In this case existing files are updated inside zip ignoring all garbage which accumulates in a tree of source codes. The second I use for "" .

53

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, MShura, you wrote: MS> I do not know as in 7z, but in zip there is a convenient functional - to update. MS> in this case existing files are updated inside zip ignoring all garbage which accumulates in a tree of source codes. There are archivers which packs files in 7z archives according to the rules which have been written down in files.zipignore (syntax is similar.gitignore).

54

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: A>> If all.pptx to rename in.zip, to unpack, and then to pack all together, it turns out even less. L> I suspect that archivers like 7-Zip at package in the continuous archive approximately and do. If to speak it is is specific about 7-Zip it simply unites some files about one flow, at the expense of it it is not necessary to build the new dictionary for each packed file. And unpacking pptx files and subsequent compression demand from the archiver of the assembly original zip, but in general purpose archivers so does not become, as the checksum of an original file does not coincide, i.e. such compression will be lossy compression. Besides it is necessary to recover not only enclosed in.pptx files, but also any meta data of an original file.

55

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> I by naivety thought that presently 7-Zip is installed on every second computer. Consider that WinRar can unpack 7-Zip archives

56

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, mrTwister, you wrote: T> Consider that WinRar can unpack 7-Zip archives of That did not know, that did not know. Probably, it is a question of rather fresh versions WinRar? To tell the truth, I twenty as alive did not see years this archiver unless for the general development sometimes I read now and then a subject about WinRar on .

57

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Nuzhny, you wrote: N> I love 7zip and I use it. The Same hogwash, but conservatism of the developer surprises. For example, he for some reason categorically does not want to make possibility of package of a tree with ways concerning the root directory (analog path=rel in pkzip25). Because of it in scripts it is necessary to do pushd/popd, irritates.

58

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> Considering that is a forum of programmers, I was surprised a little with small popularity of such archivers, as ZPAQ and FreeArc. I did not begin to add them in inquiry not to affect purity of experiment. Zip because it forms in Makosi by the right mouse button in Finder'e/Compress. Well and tar cjf archive.tar.bz2 directory for command line. Even with zip in command line not always I remember parameters, and here tar I remember by heart.

59

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: A>> If all.pptx to rename in.zip, to unpack, and then to pack all together, it turns out even less. L> I suspect that archivers like 7-Zip at package in the continuous archive approximately and do. It is improbable. If to dearchive zip, and then to archive, it is the nontrivial task that the received archive coincided byte in byte, as far as I understand. Though idea good and it is possible to spare really much, but it already will be not the general purpose archiver.

60

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Kolesiki, you wrote: K> Ha-ha!! The dude, you got out of 90-s' ?? Well approximately. Judging by a forum, at it with thickness of the channel in an Internet before recent time all was almost at that level.

61

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Ops, you wrote: Ops> Well approximately. Judging by a forum, at it with thickness of the channel in an Internet before recent time all was almost at that level. At me now 2 Mbit/c, and that cut down. P.S. Some years ago, when I here most of all grumbled, speed in "world" at me was only 512 Kbpses.

62

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Question on a charge: why developers of modern  in the core use till now OS obsolete (correct if I am mistaken) format Zip? With the same success it is possible to continue to use CD-ROM drives... P.S. Windows supports format Zip since 1998, and Mac OS - c 2003.

63

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

L> the Question on a charge: why developers of modern  in the core use till now OS obsolete (correct if I am mistaken) format Zip? Mine : moral obsolescence does not exist basically. It no more than , used for the justification someone's . Any piece can physically become outdated - when becomes unfit for use. Can become outdated functionally - when there will be new requirements to which it ceases to correspond. But here cannot morally become outdated. L> with the same success it is possible to continue to use CD-ROM drives... You will not check, but CD-ROM drives in some situations quite to yourself use. For example, when it is necessary to transfer something on the removable carrier, this carrier can transit through many hands, at it is necessary to have it a warranty that the data will not be erased and will not be distorted, and there is no desire  with .

64

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, klopodav, you wrote: K> Mine : moral obsolescence does not exist basically. It no more than , used for the justification someone's . K> Any piece can physically become outdated - when becomes unfit for use. Can become outdated functionally - when there will be new requirements to which it ceases to correspond. But here cannot morally become outdated. Format DVD-Video was once extremely popular. Transited time, and there were the new video formats providing higher quality at smaller file size. Unless it does not mean, what format DVD-Video is morally obsolete? K> you will not check, but CD-ROM drives in some situations quite to yourself use. For example, when it is necessary to transfer something on the removable carrier, this carrier can transit through many hands, at it is necessary to have it a warranty that the data will not be erased and will not be distorted, and there is no desire  with . Probably, it is a question of combined drives of DVD-RW/CD-RW.

65

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> the Question on a charge: why developers of modern  in the core use till now OS obsolete (correct if I am mistaken) format Zip? So it not become outdated, neither morally, nor it is material. On the contrary - feels sorry for all live. The role perfectly fulfills. L> with the same success it is possible to continue to use CD-ROM drives... Regularly I use a drive of CD-ROM for  compact discs.

66

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> So it not become outdated, neither morally, nor it is material. On the contrary - feels sorry for all live. The role perfectly fulfills. If to trust Wikipedia, format Zip appeared in 1989. Yes, since then Zip underwent changes, however at present there are much more effective archive formats. ARK> regularly I use a drive of CD-ROM for  compact discs. I thought, the modern fans of music use  services.

67

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

K>> Mine : moral obsolescence does not exist basically. It no more than , used for the justification someone's . K>> Any piece can physically become outdated - when becomes unfit for use. Can become outdated functionally - when there will be new requirements to which it ceases to correspond. But here cannot morally become outdated. L> format DVD-Video was once extremely popular. Transited time, and there were the new video formats providing higher quality at smaller file size. Unless it does not mean, what format DVD-Video is morally obsolete? To tell the truth, was not interested in nuances of this subject and the full information I do not possess, but I can tell so: If changes in quality were serious are it means that not morally, and is functionally obsolete. There were new requirements - people wanted   in high quality, and the old format to these requirements could not satisfy. If changes were insignificant are means that it generally did not become outdated in any way. But somebody, advocating the personal preferences, tells: "a-a-a, here these two pixels it is visible is better! It is a format it is abrupt, that format is morally obsolete!"

68

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> If to trust Wikipedia, format Zip appeared in 1989. A good thing age not a noise. Sharks since the Devonian period did not change. L> yes, since then Zip underwent changes, however at present there are much more effective archive formats. The size matters. A difference between DVD and Bluray - several times. And more effective formats - press more effectively in times? If is not present - and not in special cases, and on the average - that they are not necessary. ARK>> regularly I use a drive of CD-ROM for  compact discs. L> I thought, the modern fans of music use  services. Fans of music all different.  services do not approach me, because there there are no lossless-formats. Well and generally - I do not accept rent, I need possession.

69

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

70

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

71

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: ARK>> the Size matters. A difference between DVD and Bluray - several times. And more effective formats - press more effectively in times? If is not present - and not in special cases, and on the average - that they are not necessary. L> if be not too lazy to install the archiver 7-Zip can easily refute or confirm my statement. So it at me and so it is installed everywhere - and at home, and on operation. Only I with its help do normal zips, instead of 7-zips. Here now took a folder with source codes of one project, in size with gigabyte. Inside and the code, and . In a zip it was compressed for 40 seconds, result of 400 mbytes. In a 7-zip it was compressed for 80 seconds, result of 280 mbytes. Whether there is in it an advantage? Yes any. L> the archive.7z often turns out in one and a half-two time less, than archive Zip with the same contents. In certain cases - 10 times less. "In one and a half-two time" - it is not enough. "In certain cases" - insufficiently. It is necessary:" In all cases - a minimum in 2-3 times ". Here then, and only then, there is a chance to press a zip on wide front (and that not at once). And until then all remaining archivers will have  application.

72

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

73

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

74

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> Well in general yes - in the conditions of rigid shortage of a place already other reasons. But now this scenario absolutely rare, . Toys occupy tens gigabyte, operating systems - can and to hundred. At users hard disks of appropriate capacity. I as though in course. Nevertheless, if it is possible to spare gigabyte-other at the expense of package of files in archives of the smaller size why and is not present. ARK> I Suspect that it directly is connected here to what: ARK> H.264 is perhaps best known as being one of the video encoding standards for Blu-ray Discs; all Blu-ray Disc players must be able to decode H.264. By the way, video codec HEVC already gradually restricts AVC, though a scoring in file size at most in 2 times.

75

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> That did not know, that did not know. Probably, it is a question of rather fresh versions WinRar? To tell the truth, I twenty as alive did not see years this archiver unless for the general development sometimes I read now and then a subject about WinRar on . Here you will send so to somebody archive not-zip, and at it even if the appropriate archiver is, it can appear old and not support the necessary format. Time and again met: on a computer by mail comes rar, it try to open, and archive whether empty, whether beaten. The sender ask to send once again. Then it appears that the archive in a format rar5, and on the computer old winrar does not know that such happens and is not able to unpack it. Therefore, though winrar at me also is, it packs by default in zip.