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

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."

Luca schreef:

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

Buy it?
--
Chris Maaskant

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."

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

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

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

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."

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."

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

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."

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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