here's the message I got on my Mac Mini, running OS X 10.4.11, when I tried to open 7-zip:
Last login: Mon Jun 29 14:47:16 on ttyp1 Welcome to Darwin! Dean-Phares-Computer:~ deanphares$ /Applications/7-zip/7za; exit Bus error logout [Process completed]
"magnusfalkirk" <dean.pha...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 29, 2:06 pm, "Garberstreet Electronics" <willy4...@comcast.net> > wrote: >> I don't have a Mac, so someone try this, please.
<Commands> a: Add files to archive b: Benchmark d: Delete files from archive e: Extract files from archive (without using directory names) l: List contents of archive t: Test integrity of archive u: Update files to archive x: eXtract files with full paths <Switches> -ai[r[-|0]]{@listfile|!wildcard}: Include archives -ax[r[-|0]]{@listfile|!wildcard}: eXclude archives -bd: Disable percentage indicator -i[r[-|0]]{@listfile|!wildcard}: Include filenames -m{Parameters}: set compression Method (see the manual) -l: don't store symlinks; store the files/directories they point to CAUTION : the scanning stage can never end because of symlinks like '..' (ex: ln -s .. ldir) -o{Directory}: set Output directory -p{Password}: set Password -r[-|0]: Recurse subdirectories (CAUTION: this flag does not do what you think, avoid using it) -sfx[{name}]: Create SFX archive -si[{name}]: read data from stdin -slt: show technical information for l (List) command -so: write data to stdout (eg: 7z a dummy -tgzip -so Doc.txt > archive.gz) -ssc[-]: set sensitive case mode -t{Type}: Set type of archive -v{Size}[b|k|m|g]: Create volumes -u[-][p#][q#][r#][x#][y#][z#][!newArchiveName]: Update options -w[path]: assign Work directory. Empty path means a temporary directory -x[r[-|0]]]{@listfile|!wildcard}: eXclude filenames -y: assume Yes on all queries dopey:~ benyates$
magnusfalkirk <dean.pha...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 29, 2:06 pm, "Garberstreet Electronics" <willy4...@comcast.net> > wrote: > > I don't have a Mac, so someone try this, please.
> > It's free, open source and a whole lot more versatile.
> What's wrong with plain old Zip ? Works everywhere, doesn't require me > to download extra tools.
> And no, I don't care if <insert whiz-bang new tool> get's 2-3% better > compression. Wake me up when it's 25-50%
> Not wanting to complain, mind. Just think it's easier to stick with > simple.
> Matt
Last time I checked Zip only worked under Windows, there isn't a version of it for Mac. So either Unarchiver, or Stuffit for Mac are required to open this archive on a Mac. Unless you've got a old copy of Zipit for the Mac that works under Classic.
>>> It's free, open source and a whole lot more versatile.
>> What's wrong with plain old Zip ? Works everywhere, doesn't require me >> to download extra tools.
>> And no, I don't care if <insert whiz-bang new tool> get's 2-3% better >> compression. Wake me up when it's 25-50%
>> Not wanting to complain, mind. Just think it's easier to stick with >> simple.
>> Matt
> Last time I checked Zip only worked under Windows, there isn't a > version of it for Mac. So either Unarchiver, or Stuffit for Mac are > required to open this archive on a Mac. Unless you've got a old copy > of Zipit for the Mac that works under Classic.
> Dean
What is this? Mac OS 10.5.7 Last login: Tue Jun 30 08:44:28 on console dopey:~ benyates$ zip Copyright (c) 1990-2006 Info-ZIP - Type 'zip "-L"' for software license. Zip 2.32 (June 19th 2006). Usage: zip [-options] [-b path] [-t mmddyyyy] [-n suffixes] [zipfile list] [-xi list] The default action is to add or replace zipfile entries from list, which can include the special name - to compress standard input. If zipfile and list are omitted, zip compresses stdin to stdout. -f freshen: only changed files -u update: only changed or new files -d delete entries in zipfile -m move into zipfile (delete files) -r recurse into directories -j junk (don't record) directory names -0 store only -l convert LF to CR LF (-ll CR LF to LF) -1 compress faster -9 compress better -q quiet operation -v verbose operation/print version info -c add one-line comments -z add zipfile comment -@ read names from stdin -o make zipfile as old as latest entry -x exclude the following names -i include only the following names -F fix zipfile (-FF try harder) -D do not add directory entries -A adjust self-extracting exe -J junk zipfile prefix (unzipsfx) -T test zipfile integrity -X eXclude eXtra file attributes -y store symbolic links as the link instead of the referenced file -R PKZIP recursion (see manual) -e encrypt -n don't compress these suffixes
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009, winston19842005 wrote: > On 6/30/09 5:58 PM, in article > c991c5f7-9020-4c1c-b205-f06942518...@t13g2000yqt.googlegroups.com, > "magnusfalkirk" <dean.pha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 29, 10:24Â pm, mdj <mdj....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Jun 30, 7:09Â am, "sfahey" <sfa...@a2central.com.remove-k08-this> >>> wrote:
>>>> Â To: Garberstreet Electronics >>>> Â Re: 7-ZIP for Mac OSX ??? >>>> Â By: Garberstreet Electronics to comp.sys.apple2 on Mon Jun 29 2009 03:06 >>>> pm
>>>> It's free, open source and a whole lot more versatile.
>>> What's wrong with plain old Zip ? Works everywhere, doesn't require me >>> to download extra tools.
>>> And no, I don't care if <insert whiz-bang new tool> get's 2-3% better >>> compression. Wake me up when it's 25-50%
>>> Not wanting to complain, mind. Just think it's easier to stick with >>> simple.
>>> Matt
>> Last time I checked Zip only worked under Windows, there isn't a >> version of it for Mac. So either Unarchiver, or Stuffit for Mac are >> required to open this archive on a Mac. Unless you've got a old copy >> of Zipit for the Mac that works under Classic.
>> Dean > What is this? Mac OS 10.5.7 > Last login: Tue Jun 30 08:44:28 on console > dopey:~ benyates$ zip > Copyright (c) 1990-2006 Info-ZIP - Type 'zip "-L"' for software license. > Zip 2.32 (June 19th 2006). Usage: > zip [-options] [-b path] [-t mmddyyyy] [-n suffixes] [zipfile list] [-xi > list] > The default action is to add or replace zipfile entries from list, which > can include the special name - to compress standard input. > If zipfile and list are omitted, zip compresses stdin to stdout. > -f freshen: only changed files -u update: only changed or new files > -d delete entries in zipfile -m move into zipfile (delete files) > -r recurse into directories -j junk (don't record) directory names > -0 store only -l convert LF to CR LF (-ll CR LF to > LF) > -1 compress faster -9 compress better > -q quiet operation -v verbose operation/print version > info > -c add one-line comments -z add zipfile comment > -@ read names from stdin -o make zipfile as old as latest entry > -x exclude the following names -i include only the following names > -F fix zipfile (-FF try harder) -D do not add directory entries > -A adjust self-extracting exe -J junk zipfile prefix (unzipsfx) > -T test zipfile integrity -X eXclude eXtra file attributes > -y store symbolic links as the link instead of the referenced file > -R PKZIP recursion (see manual) > -e encrypt -n don't compress these suffixes
InfoZip (the zip/unzip you have there on OSX and I have here on Linux) will compile on just about anything. It's the ONLY zip or unzip tool I've used now for the better part of a decade, even on MS-DOS or Windows.
> This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, > while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2009, winston19842005 wrote:
>> On 6/30/09 5:58 PM, in article >> c991c5f7-9020-4c1c-b205-f06942518...@t13g2000yqt.googlegroups.com, >> "magnusfalkirk" <dean.pha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Jun 29, 10:24=C2=A0pm, mdj <mdj....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Jun 30, 7:09=C2=A0am, "sfahey" <sfa...@a2central.com.remove-k08-this=
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> =C2=A0 To: Garberstreet Electronics >>>>> =C2=A0 Re: 7-ZIP for Mac OSX ??? >>>>> =C2=A0 By: Garberstreet Electronics to comp.sys.apple2 on Mon Jun 29 2= > 009 03:06 >>>>> pm
>>>>> =C2=A0> I don't have a Mac, so someone try this, please. >>>>> =C2=A0> >>>>> =C2=A0>http://web.me.com/krmathis/
>>>>> It's free, open source and a whole lot more versatile.
>>>> What's wrong with plain old Zip ? Works everywhere, doesn't require me >>>> to download extra tools.
>>>> And no, I don't care if <insert whiz-bang new tool> get's 2-3% better >>>> compression. Wake me up when it's 25-50%
>>>> Not wanting to complain, mind. Just think it's easier to stick with >>>> simple.
>>>> Matt
>>> Last time I checked Zip only worked under Windows, there isn't a >>> version of it for Mac. So either Unarchiver, or Stuffit for Mac are >>> required to open this archive on a Mac. Unless you've got a old copy >>> of Zipit for the Mac that works under Classic.
>>> Dean >> What is this? Mac OS 10.5.7 >> Last login: Tue Jun 30 08:44:28 on console >> dopey:~ benyates$ zip >> Copyright (c) 1990-2006 Info-ZIP - Type 'zip "-L"' for software license. >> Zip 2.32 (June 19th 2006). Usage: >> zip [-options] [-b path] [-t mmddyyyy] [-n suffixes] [zipfile list] [-xi >> list] >> The default action is to add or replace zipfile entries from list, which >> can include the special name - to compress standard input. >> If zipfile and list are omitted, zip compresses stdin to stdout. >> -f freshen: only changed files -u update: only changed or new files >> -d delete entries in zipfile -m move into zipfile (delete files) >> -r recurse into directories -j junk (don't record) directory nam= > es >> -0 store only -l convert LF to CR LF (-ll CR LF to >> LF) >> -1 compress faster -9 compress better >> -q quiet operation -v verbose operation/print version >> info >> -c add one-line comments -z add zipfile comment >> -@ read names from stdin -o make zipfile as old as latest ent= > ry >> -x exclude the following names -i include only the following names >> -F fix zipfile (-FF try harder) -D do not add directory entries >> -A adjust self-extracting exe -J junk zipfile prefix (unzipsfx) >> -T test zipfile integrity -X eXclude eXtra file attributes >> -y store symbolic links as the link instead of the referenced file >> -R PKZIP recursion (see manual) >> -e encrypt -n don't compress these suffixes
> InfoZip (the zip/unzip you have there on OSX and I have here on Linux)=20 > will compile on just about anything. It's the ONLY zip or unzip tool I've= > =20 > used now for the better part of a decade, even on MS-DOS or Windows.
> -uso.
OS X does zip/unzip natively when you use the compress option in finder -- Close this world. txen eht nepO | Mark Frischknecht
magnusfalkirk <dean.pha...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 29, 10:24 pm, mdj <mdj....@gmail.com> wrote: > > What's wrong with plain old Zip ? Works everywhere, doesn't require me > > to download extra tools.
> > And no, I don't care if <insert whiz-bang new tool> get's 2-3% better > > compression. Wake me up when it's 25-50%
> > Not wanting to complain, mind. Just think it's easier to stick with > > simple.
> Last time I checked Zip only worked under Windows, there isn't a > version of it for Mac.
You can't have checked very recently, or you are only thinking of Mac OS 9 and earlier.
Others have posted references to the command line zip/unzip tools, which have always been in Mac OS X.
Recent versions of Mac OS X (definitely 10.4, possibly earlier) have an archive utility which expands most compressed file formats (including .zip) simply by double-clicking them in Finder. There is also a "Compress" menu command in Finder which creates a .zip file, so Zip is the default archive format for Mac OS X.
10.4 dates back to April 2005.
> So either Unarchiver, or Stuffit for Mac are required to open this archive > on a Mac. Unless you've got a old copy of Zipit for the Mac that works > under Classic.
Stuffit is a dead duck. Hardly anyone running Mac OS X uses it any more, and the expander hasn't been preinstalled for many years. Smith Micro (or whoever owns it now) has a somewhat obnoxious set of hoops you have to jump through just to download the free expander.
The various Stuffit Deluxe "system extensions" (such as creating an archive by simply renaming a file) have a tendency for compatibility problems with new system versions, so I'm very happy to keep them as far away from my computer as possible.
In article <c991c5f7-9020-4c1c-b205-f06942518...@t13g2000yqt.googlegroups.com>,
magnusfalkirk <dean.pha...@gmail.com> wrote: >Last time I checked Zip only worked under Windows, there isn't a >version of it for Mac.
Um...zip has been available on multiple platforms for ages. PKZIP (and its descendants) may have been DOS- and Windows-based, but nobody uses it anymore.
I don't recall if the command-line-based zip/unzip tools on my G4 mini came with it or if I added them on through MacPorts or whatever, but they run just fine. I thik Stuffit Expander handles the format as well.
There's even an unzip implementation for the Apple II (to bring things back on-topic), IIRC.
_/_ / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail) (IIGS( http://alfter.us/ Top-posting! \_^_/ rm -rf /bin/laden >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
>>It's free, open source and a whole lot more versatile.
> What's wrong with plain old Zip ? Works everywhere, doesn't require me > to download extra tools.
> And no, I don't care if <insert whiz-bang new tool> get's 2-3% better > compression. Wake me up when it's 25-50%
> Not wanting to complain, mind. Just think it's easier to stick with > simple.
My thoughts exactly.
Occasional specialized filetypes have special redundancies that justify particular compressions (JPEG, MP3, etc.), but virtually everything else can be sufficiently compressed with a standard app--and the world is much better with fewer "standards". ;-)
The last thing we need is a bunch of people writing their own peculiar data compression programs for public distribution.
On Jul 3, 3:26 am, "Michael J. Mahon" <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:
> The last thing we need is a bunch of people writing their own > peculiar data compression programs for public distribution.
While I agree, I'm not sure why this thread was started ...
Perhaps because I mentioned 7-Zip in another thread as being able to open a file that Vista and Mac OS's GUI unzip failed to open.
In any case 7-Zip for Windows and The Unarchiver for Mac OS provide more useful (GUI) features than the built-in GUI tools, and this is the reason to use them - not the 7z file compression method.
> >>It's free, open source and a whole lot more versatile.
> > What's wrong with plain old Zip ? Works everywhere, doesn't require me > > to download extra tools.
> > And no, I don't care if <insert whiz-bang new tool> get's 2-3% better > > compression. Wake me up when it's 25-50%
> > Not wanting to complain, mind. Just think it's easier to stick with > > simple.
> My thoughts exactly.
> Occasional specialized filetypes have special redundancies that > justify particular compressions (JPEG, MP3, etc.), but virtually > everything else can be sufficiently compressed with a standard > app--and the world is much better with fewer "standards". ;-)
> The last thing we need is a bunch of people writing their own > peculiar data compression programs for public distribution.
Indeed. Also, LZW and "deflate" class algorithms can be implemented on machines with very modest resources, for example, Apple II's :-)
In order to get better results than those two, you need to spend ridiculous amounts of CPU time, like for example the Burrows-Wheeler transform used by bzip2 which is widely used in the Unix community. Strangely, compression of this type can be parallelised, but that feature still isn't in the standard distribution.
Beyond that, you've got PPM style algorithms which are effective, but require the 2+Ghz processing and >1GB free ram characteristics of modern machines. Interesting stuff academically speaking, but not pragmatically useful for widespread public use.
To: Michael J. Mahon Re: Re: 7-ZIP for Mac OSX ??? By: Michael J. Mahon to comp.sys.apple2 on Thu Jul 02 2009 11:26 am
> Occasional specialized filetypes have special redundancies that > justify particular compressions (JPEG, MP3, etc.), but virtually > everything else can be sufficiently compressed with a standard > app--and the world is much better with fewer "standards". ;-) > > The last thing we need is a bunch of people writing their own > peculiar data compression programs for public distribution.
Yeah, because if no one didn't try to innovate and do something better than the existing standard, we could all still be using ARC to archive our files. Damn you Phil Katz for writing your own peculiar data compression program for public distribution that eventually became a popular standard.
> To: Michael J. Mahon > Re: Re: 7-ZIP for Mac OSX ??? > By: Michael J. Mahon to comp.sys.apple2 on Thu Jul 02 2009 11:26 am
> > Occasional specialized filetypes have special redundancies that > > justify particular compressions (JPEG, MP3, etc.), but virtually > > everything else can be sufficiently compressed with a standard > > app--and the world is much better with fewer "standards". ;-) > > > > The last thing we need is a bunch of people writing their own > > peculiar data compression programs for public distribution.
> Yeah, because if no one didn't try to innovate and do something better than the > existing standard, we could all still be using ARC to archive our files. Damn > you Phil Katz for writing your own peculiar data compression program for public > distribution that eventually became a popular standard.
> </sarcasm>
And now that we're free of all that patent/proprietary malarky, are you advocating that we go back ?
<mdj....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 4, 12:04 am, "sfahey" <sfa...@a2central.com.remove-exp-this> > wrote: >> To: mdj >> Re: Re: 7-ZIP for Mac OSX ??? >> By: mdj to comp.sys.apple2 on Thu Jul 02 2009 08:09 pm
>> > And now that we're free of all that patent/proprietary malarky, are >> > you advocating that we go back ?
>> Missed the /sarcasm tag?
> No, but there's a line (or perhaps it's a chasm) between mockery and > ridicule ...
> Sometimes it's hard to tell ;-)
But he has a VERY good point... I'm a TI-er - one thing we were guilty of was once we designed the wheel, that was it. Seems like once something was done, it was done. With a few exceptions, if you have a program to do "A", that is how you do it.
If a TI-er had designed the original wheel by carving it out of stone, we'd all be enjoying really rough rides!
winston19842005 wrote: > On 7/3/09 11:24 AM, in article > 9dfb877e-db8d-4156-8003-9f267da07...@i4g2000prm.googlegroups.com, "mdj" > <mdj....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 4, 12:04 am, "sfahey" <sfa...@a2central.com.remove-exp-this> >> wrote: >>> To: mdj >>> Re: Re: 7-ZIP for Mac OSX ??? >>> By: mdj to comp.sys.apple2 on Thu Jul 02 2009 08:09 pm
>>> > And now that we're free of all that patent/proprietary malarky, are >>> > you advocating that we go back ?
>>> Missed the /sarcasm tag? >> No, but there's a line (or perhaps it's a chasm) between mockery and >> ridicule ...
>> Sometimes it's hard to tell ;-)
> But he has a VERY good point... > I'm a TI-er - one thing we were guilty of was once we designed the wheel, > that was it. > Seems like once something was done, it was done. With a few exceptions, if > you have a program to do "A", that is how you do it.
> If a TI-er had designed the original wheel by carving it out of stone, we'd > all be enjoying really rough rides!
I got the joke, Sean. ;-)
And, of course, I wasn't advocating freezing the world--in fact, my career was mainly spent trying to establish new computing standards.
But that's the point--to inject a new compression format into the mix at this point demands that it be a *significant* improvement on the existing standards, which most of the zip "fiddles" do not do.
In the late 1980s, there was a maxim in the Unix community which summed this up pretty well: "Being standard is better than being better."
The issue is not ruling out (significant) improvements, the issue is gaining the benefits of stability that standards offer all of us. This usually means that a new standard must remain backward compatible with the old standard, so that they can interoperate during a transition period of indefinite length.
Of course, this process eventually leads to an impasse, so that a major break must occur with the launch of a new standard, and early adopters get to deal with all the transition confusion.
Such technology transitions are 1) inevitable and ultimately beneficial, and 2) to be avoided until the cost/benefit ratio justifies the pain of a transition.
Making incompatible "fiddley" changes to a pervasive standard for no real gain actually "poisons the well" for eventually needed changes by causing users pain for little gain--and we all have long memories of pain. ;-)
This does not mean that specialized compression schemes don't have their uses, but it does mean that when they are used, they should be "wrapped" in otherwise application-specific file formats if they are persistent.
This is the case with the hi-res packer/unpacker that inspired this thread. It is intended to be used within an application, not used for a public distribution format. If used for distribution, the unpacker would generally be included with the distribution.
I've even done this myself! SOUND.EDITOR can save sounds as 2:1 ADPCM-compressed files, which it packs and unpacks. (It and the source for the ADPCM compressor/decompressor are on my web site.)
The purpose was to make sound files practical on a 5.25" disk system, and the algorithm is an 8-bit version of the standard Intel DVI ADPCM algorithm, so it's about as "standard" as fast execution on an Apple II permits. ;-)
(In fact, it should decompress using the standard 16-bit codec, though I haven't actually tried that.)
|
