Alternative to rar split files? - Suse

This is a discussion on Alternative to rar split files? - Suse ; Is there a workaround to keep rar functioning after the trial period? I would really like to be able to use it for splitting up my large files, but it's not worth 30 Euros to me. (What a rip-off!) So ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 45

Thread: Alternative to rar split files?

  1. Alternative to rar split files?

    Is there a workaround to keep rar functioning after the trial period? I
    would really like to be able to use it for splitting up my large files,
    but it's not worth 30 Euros to me. (What a rip-off!)
    So my question is, can you somehow make it work anyway, or what
    alternative compressors/splitters do you use?

    So far, I've used HJSplit and I'm quite happy with it, but it's not as
    common on people's systems.

    Cheers,
    Luca
    --
    "**** a mic check, I bring my flow in cash."

  2. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    Luca wrote:
    > Is there a workaround to keep rar functioning after the trial period? I
    > would really like to be able to use it for splitting up my large files,
    > but it's not worth 30 Euros to me. (What a rip-off!)
    > So my question is, can you somehow make it work anyway, or what
    > alternative compressors/splitters do you use?
    >
    > So far, I've used HJSplit and I'm quite happy with it, but it's not as
    > common on people's systems.


    Just use "split". See the man page for details.

    --
    Stephen Chadfield

  3. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    Stephen Chadfield wrote:

    > Just use "split". See the man page for details.


    Yeah, works nicely. I just wonder if Windows and Mac users could join
    the bits again...

    Luca
    --
    "**** a mic check, I bring my flow in cash."

  4. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    Luca schreef:

    > Is there a workaround to keep rar functioning after the trial period?


    Buy it?
    --
    Chris Maaskant

  5. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    Chris Maaskant wrote:
    > Luca schreef:
    >
    >> Is there a workaround to keep rar functioning after the trial period?

    >
    > Buy it?


    I was actually considering it, but I ain't shoving no 30 Euros up some
    reseller's bum. I'm not that desperate.

    Luca
    --
    "**** a mic check, I bring my flow in cash."

  6. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    Luca wrote:
    > Stephen Chadfield wrote:
    >
    >> Just use "split". See the man page for details.

    >
    > Yeah, works nicely. I just wonder if Windows and Mac users could join
    > the bits again...
    >
    > Luca


    type file2 >> file1
    type file3 >> file1
    ....

    Uwe

  7. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Uwe Grauer wrote:-

    >Luca wrote:
    >> Stephen Chadfield wrote:
    >>
    >>> Just use "split". See the man page for details.

    >>
    >> Yeah, works nicely. I just wonder if Windows and Mac users could join
    >> the bits again...
    >>
    >> Luca

    >
    >type file2 >> file1
    >type file3 >> file1


    Type is usually used for viewing text files, similar to more. Either of
    these would possibly be the better choice:

    copy /b file1+file2+file3+file4 complete.file

    or

    copy /b file* complete.file


    Regards,
    David Bolt

    --
    www.davjam.org/lifetype/ www.distributed.net: OGR@100Mnodes, RC5-72@15Mkeys
    | SUSE 10.1 32bit | openSUSE 10.2 32bit | openSUSE 10.3 32bit
    SUSE 10.0 64bit | SUSE 10.1 64bit | openSUSE 10.2 64bit |
    RISC OS 3.11 | RISC OS 3.6 | TOS 4.02 | openSUSE 10.3 PPC

  8. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    On 2007-10-29, Luca wrote:
    > Is there a workaround to keep rar functioning after the trial period? I
    > would really like to be able to use it for splitting up my large files,
    > but it's not worth 30 Euros to me. (What a rip-off!)
    > So my question is, can you somehow make it work anyway, or what
    > alternative compressors/splitters do you use?


    There is a 30 day trial period?
    Strange, I never saw that...


    --
    There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying.
    The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
    Douglas Adams

  9. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    David Bolt wrote:
    > On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Uwe Grauer wrote:-
    >
    >> Luca wrote:
    >>> Stephen Chadfield wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Just use "split". See the man page for details.
    >>> Yeah, works nicely. I just wonder if Windows and Mac users could join
    >>> the bits again...


    >> type file2 >> file1
    >> type file3 >> file1

    >
    > Type is usually used for viewing text files, similar to more. Either of
    > these would possibly be the better choice:
    >
    > copy /b file1+file2+file3+file4 complete.file
    >
    > or
    >
    > copy /b file* complete.file


    Now you guys have lost me. I suppose this is not something a
    Windows-using friend of mine could do if I sent him the files, now could
    he? (If I'm wrong, tell me.)
    I do understand that I can join them again on my Suse, but does anyone
    know what it takes for other platforms to understand how to work such files?
    Or, again, what do you folks use to split and share files? Or don't you
    have any non-Linux friends?

    Thanks,

    Luca
    --
    "**** a mic check, I bring my flow in cash."

  10. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    David Bolt wrote:
    > On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Uwe Grauer wrote:-
    >
    >> Luca wrote:
    >>> Stephen Chadfield wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Just use "split". See the man page for details.
    >>> Yeah, works nicely. I just wonder if Windows and Mac users could join
    >>> the bits again...


    [suggestions for joining file bits after "split"ting them:]

    >> type file2 >> file1
    >> type file3 >> file1


    > copy /b file* complete.file


    btw, "copy" wasn't available on my system, for whatever reason. Or at
    least this syntax didn't lead anywhere.
    I've joined the bits with cat instead, which works like a beauty and
    very fast.

    e.g.

    cat fileprefix-a* > completefile

    (a* stands for aa, ab, ac, ad, ae, etc, which are the autogenerated
    suffixes produced by "split")

    Luca
    --
    "**** a mic check, I bring my flow in cash."

  11. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Luca wrote:-

    >David Bolt wrote:


    >>> Luca wrote:
    >>>> Stephen Chadfield wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Just use "split". See the man page for details.
    >>>> Yeah, works nicely. I just wonder if Windows and Mac users could join
    >>>> the bits again...


    >> copy /b file* complete.file

    >
    >btw, "copy" wasn't available on my system, for whatever reason. Or at
    >least this syntax didn't lead anywhere.


    I mentioned copy because you mentioned whether Windows users could
    rejoin the files. They're commands entered at the "DOS" prompt.

    >I've joined the bits with cat instead, which works like a beauty and
    >very fast.


    That it is.

    >cat fileprefix-a* > completefile
    >
    >(a* stands for aa, ab, ac, ad, ae, etc, which are the autogenerated
    >suffixes produced by "split")


    I prefer using numerical suffixes, probably because I like to maintain
    compatibility with hjsplit and lxsplit.


    Regards,
    David Bolt

    --
    www.davjam.org/lifetype/ www.distributed.net: OGR@100Mnodes, RC5-72@15Mkeys
    | SUSE 10.1 32bit | openSUSE 10.2 32bit | openSUSE 10.3 32bit
    SUSE 10.0 64bit | SUSE 10.1 64bit | openSUSE 10.2 64bit |
    RISC OS 3.11 | RISC OS 3.6 | TOS 4.02 | openSUSE 10.3 PPC

  12. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    David Bolt wrote:

    > I mentioned copy because you mentioned whether Windows users could
    > rejoin the files. They're commands entered at the "DOS" prompt.


    See, this I didn't get. So people could use the command prompt on Win...
    good to know, for me. Unfortunately, this may not be user-friendly
    enough (read: absolutely foolproof enough). Remember: most people have
    no experience whatsoever with command lines, and they're afraid of using
    them - probably better that way...

    > I prefer using numerical suffixes, probably because I like to maintain
    > compatibility with hjsplit and lxsplit.


    Sounds pretty handy. Either I'll figure out how to do that myself or
    you'll tell me... (So "split" doesn't necessarily use alphabetical
    suffixes?)
    Then again, I might just as well use hjsplit on the command line or on
    the java GUI to do the splits.

    Luca
    --
    "**** a mic check, I bring my flow in cash."

  13. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    David Bolt wrote:
    > On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Uwe Grauer wrote:-
    >
    >> Luca wrote:
    >>> Stephen Chadfield wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Just use "split". See the man page for details.
    >>> Yeah, works nicely. I just wonder if Windows and Mac users could join
    >>> the bits again...
    >>>
    >>> Luca

    >> type file2 >> file1
    >> type file3 >> file1

    >
    > Type is usually used for viewing text files, similar to more. Either of
    > these would possibly be the better choice:
    >
    > copy /b file1+file2+file3+file4 complete.file
    >
    > or
    >
    > copy /b file* complete.file
    >
    >
    > Regards,
    > David Bolt
    >


    Any arguments why type can't be used or why copy should be saver?

    Uwe

  14. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    Luca wrote:
    > Is there a workaround to keep rar functioning after the trial period? I
    > would really like to be able to use it for splitting up my large files,
    > but it's not worth 30 Euros to me. (What a rip-off!)
    > So my question is, can you somehow make it work anyway, or what
    > alternative compressors/splitters do you use?
    >
    > So far, I've used HJSplit and I'm quite happy with it, but it's not as
    > common on people's systems.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Luca

    Go to > http://www.crack.ms/ and find a key for it.


  15. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    Luca wrote:
    >Stephen Chadfield wrote:


    >> Just use "split". See the man page for details.


    >Yeah, works nicely. I just wonder if Windows and Mac users could join
    >the bits again...


    Used to be able to. One of the mutants of "copy" did it, I think.

    --
    --- Paul J. Gans

  16. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    Luca wrote:
    >David Bolt wrote:


    >> I mentioned copy because you mentioned whether Windows users could
    >> rejoin the files. They're commands entered at the "DOS" prompt.


    >See, this I didn't get. So people could use the command prompt on Win...
    > good to know, for me. Unfortunately, this may not be user-friendly
    >enough (read: absolutely foolproof enough). Remember: most people have
    >no experience whatsoever with command lines, and they're afraid of using
    >them - probably better that way...


    You've just pointed out what is wrong with GUI interfaces. They
    can't do everything. In fact, they can't do *anything* out of
    the ordinary.

    The user of a GUI becomes a slave to what the programmers have
    provided.

    Which is why I object to linux distros becoming *too* Windows-like.

    On the other hand, a GUI is very useful for folks who just want
    to get some work done. I use KDE extensively, but much of what
    I do is done in shell konsole.

    --
    --- Paul J. Gans

  17. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    Uwe Grauer wrote:
    >David Bolt wrote:
    >> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Uwe Grauer wrote:-
    >>
    >>> Luca wrote:
    >>>> Stephen Chadfield wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Just use "split". See the man page for details.
    >>>> Yeah, works nicely. I just wonder if Windows and Mac users could join
    >>>> the bits again...
    >>>>
    >>>> Luca
    >>> type file2 >> file1
    >>> type file3 >> file1

    >>
    >> Type is usually used for viewing text files, similar to more. Either of
    >> these would possibly be the better choice:
    >>
    >> copy /b file1+file2+file3+file4 complete.file
    >>
    >> or
    >>
    >> copy /b file* complete.file
    >>
    >>
    >> Regards,
    >> David Bolt
    >>


    >Any arguments why type can't be used or why copy should be saver?


    I do not KNOW, but it may involve the crazy Windows end of line
    protocol. Catenating files with type *MAY* insert CR/LF combinations
    at the join points because type assumes that the files are ASCII and
    not binary.

    --
    --- Paul J. Gans

  18. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Uwe Grauer wrote:-

    >Any arguments why type can't be used or why copy should be saver?


    There may be character translation occur, which the /b option for copy
    ensures won't happen. If the input files are text, and they're going to
    be used in a DOS-based environment, there's no reason to no use type. If
    the files aren't text, why risk it?


    Regards,
    David Bolt

    --
    www.davjam.org/lifetype/ www.distributed.net: OGR@100Mnodes, RC5-72@15Mkeys
    | SUSE 10.1 32bit | openSUSE 10.2 32bit | openSUSE 10.3 32bit
    SUSE 10.0 64bit | SUSE 10.1 64bit | openSUSE 10.2 64bit |
    RISC OS 3.11 | RISC OS 3.6 | TOS 4.02 | openSUSE 10.3 PPC

  19. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:52:19 +0100, Luca wrote:

    > Is there a workaround to keep rar functioning after the trial period? I
    > would really like to be able to use it for splitting up my large files,
    > but it's not worth 30 Euros to me. (What a rip-off!) So my question is,
    > can you somehow make it work anyway, or what alternative
    > compressors/splitters do you use?
    >
    > So far, I've used HJSplit and I'm quite happy with it, but it's not as
    > common on people's systems.


    You don't need Hjsplit to join them together again. Create Par2s for the
    original file(s), then split it with Hjsplit or whatever and repair with
    the Par2s, it'll join it back together again. It's common practise in
    many Usenet binary groups.

  20. Re: Alternative to rar split files?

    On 2007-10-30, Luca wrote:
    > David Bolt wrote:
    >
    >> I mentioned copy because you mentioned whether Windows users could
    >> rejoin the files. They're commands entered at the "DOS" prompt.

    >
    > See, this I didn't get. So people could use the command prompt on Win...
    > good to know, for me. Unfortunately, this may not be user-friendly
    > enough (read: absolutely foolproof enough). Remember: most people have
    > no experience whatsoever with command lines, and they're afraid of using
    > them - probably better that way...


    So give them the batch file that will do it for them.
    Simple instructions: put all files (including the batch) in the same dir.
    Double-clic on the batch.

    To make the batch, just create a file called 'glue.cmd', and put the line:
    copy /b part1.dat+part2.dat+part3.dat+part4.dat total.dat
    .... in it. That's how simple it is.

    But using RAR is even better. :-)


    --
    There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying.
    The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
    Douglas Adams

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast