On 5/24/06, Пётр Косаревский с mail.ru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
FK> Jonas Maebe wrote: >> On 24 mei 2006, at 17:30, Florian Klaempfl wrote: >> >>> Not really because it is simply a tar ball of several .tar.gz. Because >>> gzip is spread wider, we use this instead of bzip2/7zip. >> Isn't bzip2 available more or less everywhere nowadays? (at least where >> gzip is available, and in particular on Linux?) FK> At least on debian woody it wasn't installed by default. No idea about FK> sarge.
AFAIR it is even used for .debs. Does priority "important" makes it installed by default? http://packages.qa.debian.org/b/bzip2.html http://packages.debian.org/stable/utils/bzip2
Just wondering: is RAR considered "spread wide"?
I would say definetely _no_.
I know that compressor is commercial, but uncompressor is not (sources are available, if I remember right), and it
The open source version only supports old formats, the newest format(s?) is only supported by a closed-source (but free as in beer) version, which must be downloaded separately (even if it only requires using synaptic...).
compresses sources better than gzip by 25% (often even more). There are better compressors, they are free (sometimes even open source), but support matters (dos, windows, pocket pc, linux, free bsd and macos x versions are ready to download).
bzip2 has similar compression rates (except maybe for multimedia files, which isn't the case) and 7zip/LZMA usually compresses better than RAR. 7zip isn't installed by default in any distro AFAIK, but at least it open source. RAR would be my last option... Cheers, Flávio
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
