darrinm@cabezon.uucp (Darrin Mossor) (05/08/91)
I am looking for a tool to compress a directory and subdirectories on a Unix system. Specifically an HP/Apollo Workstation. The tool would have the ability to archive and restore a directory and would also compress the result. I only have access via anonymous FTP (via BITNET), so I need a site and such. Any suggestions? Favorites? Pros and Cons? BTW, in my application, size (or lack of) is more important than speed of compression or decompression. Thanks for any input! -Darrin Mossor -- /* ---------------------------------------------------------------------- */ Darrin Mossor | "Clothes make the man. Naked people have little Logic Automation | or no influence on society." -- Mark Twain ...!mntgfx!lauto!darrinm | #include <stddisclaimer.h>
glenn@huxley.huxley.bitstream.com (Glenn P. Parker) (05/08/91)
In article <1991May7.201635.1180@cabezon.uucp> darrinm@cabezon.uucp (Darrin Mossor) writes: > I am looking for a tool to compress a directory and subdirectories > on a Unix system. Specifically an HP/Apollo Workstation. The tool > would have the ability to archive and restore a directory and would > also compress the result. So what's wrong with tar followed by compress? As in: tar cf dirname.tar dirname # creates dirname.tar compress dirname.tar # replaces it with dirname.tar.Z To restore: uncompress -c dirname.tar.Z | tar xf - tar should already be on your workstation (if you have anything resembling UN*X installed), and compress is widely available via ftp. I use this on an Apollo 3500 all the time. -- Glenn P. Parker glenn@bitstream.com Bitstream, Inc. uunet!huxley!glenn 215 First Street BIX: parker Cambridge, MA 02142-1270
abl@thevenin.ece.cmu.edu (Antonio Leal) (05/09/91)
darrinm@cabezon.uucp (Darrin Mossor) writes: > > I am looking for a tool to compress a directory and subdirectories > on a Unix system. Specifically an HP/Apollo Workstation. The tool > would have the ability to archive and restore a directory and would > also compress the result. [...] I'd go with tar cf - topdir | compress > topdir.tar.Z and zcat topdir.tar.Z | tar xf - to archive and restore, respectively. (tar and compress/zcat do come standard with HP/UX or Domain, right ?) -- Antonio B. Leal Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering Bell: [412] 268-2937 Carnegie Mellon University Net: abl@ece.cmu.edu Pittsburgh, PA. 15213 U.S.A.
mtpins@icaen.uiowa.edu (Michael T Pins) (05/09/91)
darrinm@cabezon.uucp (Darrin Mossor) writes: > I am looking for a tool to compress a directory and subdirectories >on a Unix system. Specifically an HP/Apollo Workstation. The tool >would have the ability to archive and restore a directory and would >also compress the result. I only have access via anonymous FTP >(via BITNET), so I need a site and such. > Any suggestions? Favorites? Pros and Cons? > BTW, in my application, size (or lack of) is more important than >speed of compression or decompression. You have a number of choices from which to choose. The old favorites tar and compress are probably already on your machine, and do a decent job. Main advantage here is that it means anyone else on a Unix box will be able to restore it without looking for special software. You could also use lharc, the sourcecode for which is on isca01.isca.uiowa.edu in the unix directory. Lharc will do it in one sweep, compresses as well as nearly anything available, and is readily available for Amigas/PCs/etc. The downside is you'll probably need to install lharc, as will anyone else who wants to restore it on another machine. Firestar -- ***************************************************************************** * Michael Pins (Firestar) | Internet: mtpins@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu * * ISCA's Amiga Librarian | #include <std.disclaimer> * *****************************************************************************
adrianho@barkley.berkeley.edu (Adrian J Ho) (05/09/91)
In article <NVxHUKy.673728347@l_eld09.icaen.uiowa.edu> mtpins@icaen.uiowa.edu (Michael T Pins) writes: >The old favorites tar and compress are probably already on your machine, >and do a decent job. Main advantage here is that it means anyone else on >a Unix box will be able to restore it without looking for special software. Plus, it'll work on all kinds of files. To understand why I made that remark, read on. >You could also use lharc, the sourcecode for which is on isca01.isca.uiowa.edu >in the unix directory. Lharc will do it in one sweep, compresses as well as >nearly anything available, and is readily available for Amigas/PCs/etc. >The downside is you'll probably need to install lharc, as will anyone else >who wants to restore it on another machine. There's another disadvantage: Lharc (at least UNIX V1.02) doesn't handle symbolic links properly -- it makes a copy of the linked-to file! A real pain if the linked-to file is HUGE, and VERY aggravating for archiving source distributions that you're working on -- I've personally torn a good part of my hair out trying to chase down a "bug", only to find that all my links to a recently-modified file had "mysteriously" turned into out-of-date copies of the same file! One more thing: Unix .lzh files will NOT unpack on other machines, due to the different file permission scheme used (things will work going the other way, though). I learnt this the hard way, too. 8-( My advice? If you're sticking to Unix, _and_ you don't use symbolic links, _and_ you're concerned with maximum compression, _and_ you're not concerned with speed, use lharc. Otherwise, stick with tar and compress -- this combo _works_. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Adrian Ho, EECS (pronounced "eeks!") Dept. Phone: (415) 642-5563 UC Berkeley adrianho@barkley.berkeley.edu
adrianho@barkley.berkeley.edu (Adrian J Ho) (05/09/91)
Just like me to shoot my mouth off! 8-) I wrote: >One more thing: Unix .lzh files will NOT unpack on other machines, due >to the different file permission scheme used (things will work going >the other way, though). I learnt this the hard way, too. 8-( That, of course, is an utter load of bullcrap. It was a chronic lack of sleep (both then and now) that made me overlook the "g" (generic) and "A" (Amiga) options. The rest of my comments still hold, though. I think..... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Adrian Ho, EECS (pronounced "eeks!") Dept. Phone: (415) 642-5563 UC Berkeley adrianho@barkley.berkeley.edu
darrinm@cabezon.uucp (Darrin Mossor) (05/09/91)
Thanks for all the responses to my request for archive information on UNIX boxes. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of not being clear in my request for info. I am aware of tar/compress, and in fact, am still considering it as a solution (for many of the reasons pointed out here: portability, stability, etc). What I failed to make clear is that I was looking for _other_ solutions and how they might compare to tar/compress or any other solutions. Personally, I like the idea of lharc, as it does it all in one swell foop! However speed and size are still considerations. At any rate, thanks to all for the suggestions regarding tar/compress (most of the solutions were more elegant than mine, I'm jealous ;-). -Darrin Mossor -- /* ---------------------------------------------------------------------- */ Darrin Mossor | "Clothes make the man. Naked people have little Logic Automation | or no influence on society." -- Mark Twain ...!mntgfx!lauto!darrinm | #include <stddisclaimer.h>
jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) (05/10/91)
Nobody has mentioned zoo as a compressing archiver.
It's been around longer than lharc, and works pretty well.
--
Joe Smith (408)922-6220 | SMTP: jms@tardis.tymnet.com or jms@gemini.tymnet.com
BT Tymnet Tech Services | UUCP: ...!{ames,pyramid}!oliveb!tymix!tardis!jms
PO Box 49019, MS-C51 | BIX: smithjoe | CA license plate: "POPJ P," (PDP-10)
San Jose, CA 95161-9019 | humorous dislaimer: "My Amiga 3000 speaks for me."madler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Mark Adler) (05/10/91)
In article <1822@tardis.Tymnet.COM> jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) writes: >Nobody has mentioned zoo as a compressing archiver. >It's been around longer than lharc, and works pretty well. The version of Zoo I have (2.01) runs at about half the speed of tar and compress on my system, and doesn't compress as well to boot. For example, on a 6.4M postscript file, compress made it 733277 bytes in 28.6 seconds, and zoo made it 836005 bytes in 53.9 seconds. However, I have heard rumor of a new and improved zoo coming out Real Soon Now. Mark Adler madler@pooh.caltech.edu
klute@tommy.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (Rainer Klute) (05/10/91)
In article <NVxHUKy.673728347@l_eld09.icaen.uiowa.edu>, mtpins@icaen.uiowa.edu (Michael T Pins) writes: |> Lharc will do it in one sweep, compresses as well as |> nearly anything available, and is readily available for Amigas/PCs/etc. Oh yes, and even in several (incompatible) versions :-). -- Dipl.-Inform. Rainer Klute klute@irb.informatik.uni-dortmund.de Univ. Dortmund, IRB klute@unido.uucp, klute@unido.bitnet Postfach 500500 |)|/ Tel.: +49 231 755-4663 D-4600 Dortmund 50 |\|\ Fax : +49 231 755-2386
jv@mh.nl (Johan Vromans) (05/11/91)
In article <1991May10.031244.3509@nntp-server.caltech.edu> madler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Mark Adler) writes:
However, I have heard rumor of a new and improved zoo coming out
Real Soon Now.
Will it support hard- and symlinks? European timezones?
Johan
--
Johan Vromans jv@mh.nl via internet backbones
Multihouse Automatisering bv uucp: ..!{uunet,hp4nl}!mh.nl!jv
Doesburgweg 7, 2803 PL Gouda, The Netherlands phone/fax: +31 1820 62911/62500
------------------------ "Arms are made for hugging" -------------------------madler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Mark Adler) (05/12/91)
In article <1991May11.122934.917@pronto.mh.nl> Johan Vromans <jv@mh.nl> writes: >In article <1991May10.031244.3509@nntp-server.caltech.edu> madler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Mark Adler) writes: > > However, I have heard rumor of a new and improved zoo coming out > Real Soon Now. > >Will it support hard- and symlinks? European timezones? > > Johan Beats me. Like most rumors, it lacked greatly in detail. Zip will though ... Mark Adler madler@pooh.caltech.edu
davidsen@rdsunx.crd.GE.COM (William E Davidsen) (05/15/91)
In article <1991May9.162759.4000@cabezon.uucp>, darrinm@cabezon.uucp (Darrin Mossor) writes: |> What I failed to make clear is that I was looking for _other_ solutions |> and how they might compare to tar/compress or any other solutions. |> Personally, I like the idea of lharc, as it does it all in one swell |> foop! However speed and size are still considerations. At some time before the end of the year a free version of ZIP for UNIX is likely to come out. While it is slower than lharc, compression is similar and portability to UNIX and MS-DOS is good, Mac and Amiga likely to be included. I have been in touch with the author of ARJ and he is planning to offer some kind of crippled compressor for UNIX if any. I suggested that a portable version would help his shareware distribution in the MS-DOS world but he doesn't see it that way. Lharc 2.x doesn't seem to be ported to UNIX yet.