Path: csiph.com!tncsrv06.tnetconsulting.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2023 05:52:39 +0000 Subject: Re: Zip list Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc References: <0LqcnRugEt7aNnL-nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> <87pma61xl0.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> From: "25A.I866" <25A.I866@noacba.net> Organization: valence seaweed Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2023 00:51:19 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: Lines: 77 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.222.41.46 X-Trace: sv3-Cvx2hXfRuTfA+e8noN8SL0LRixiBK8f13INb26TUWM9pNLiudA2BUxzk3hXIv5gIWG7CIoArr4gPoQq!Fmfq7BHSqFzJY8lqDkBb73ZEk46eb8UdBx9bOhcwfV1g6PkiLpPMLtDBaM17Y028uiqzic+wVsOp!4G+8QrsiC7K7xJBA+bc= X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Received-Bytes: 4889 Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:37261 On 2/19/23 6:48 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2023-02-19 12:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 18/02/2023 21:18, Andreas Kohlbach wrote: >>> On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 13:15:31 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> >>>> On 18/02/2023 11:43, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>>>> On 2023-02-18 11:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> RAR was my pet hate... >>>>>> >>>>> Why? :-?  :-o >>>>> >>>> Could never find an unpacking program that ran on Unix. >>> >>> unrar x file.rar >>> >>> should deflate the content into the PWD. >> >> Today yes, not in 1993, to run on SCO Unix. > > Well, RAR for DOS appeared on 1993! :-D > > So in 1993 there wasn't a version for Linux, either. > > I believe the sources were published with version 2, or version 2 > sources were published when version 3 appeared. The wikipedia article > doesn't have dates for these. But as soon as those sources appeared, > anybody could compile a version for Unix. Always SOUNDS so simple :-) I always wind up having to write fill-ins for the missing/very-different library routines between Win and Lin. Anyway, I'm not sure about the fascination with RAR. It is good, but then so are many others that are more modern/portable/supported. Found an interesting "loop-based" approach to an Str2Int64() today. Basically it does powers of ten on each digit (derived from the ASCII values of the digits minus-48). It MAY be a bit faster than the one I wrote the other day for Pascal that involves 'shrinking down' the presented number. I'll have to benchmark. Mine only used integer subtraction and ONE modulo. Not AS many steps. But, we'll see. I was writing a "disk visualizer" the other day (turned out pretty well) but Int64 numbers/functions ARE involved. Today I took that to write a 'C' "Disk Blaster" ... kinda like using 'dd' to zero (or pattern-write) a whole drive but because it's not as complex it's about 30% quicker. Added a 'skitter' option that's applied AFTER the prescribed number of bytes are overwritten ... 'skittering' means writing yer zero/pattern block roughly (a little randomness added to annoy) every 50mb on the REST of the disk area. It is not 'erasure' per-se, but kinda 'corrupts' and is 50x as fast. You can go thru a 1tb disk in an external USB3.0 fixture in about five minutes with 'skittering'. So, you totally obliterate the X-bytes you're most paranoid about and then randomly insert junk in the rest. Just gotta smooth-out the params ... there's no slack right now. Something like 'dd' params would be good. It always uses the equiv of "bs=1M" ... seems the best compromise after some experimentation. My visualizer made it easy to see if the blaster util was doing it right. FYI - I have a PILE of old HDDs ... some just Too Old, others Flakey. They NEED to be wiped, or at least quasi-wiped, before disposal. If I have the time I strip them of the magnets and pretty platters, but that takes 20-30 minutes per so sometimes I'll just trash the whole thing. (a cold-chisel and big hammer will also trash old hdd's really well :-)