This might be the wrong ng but anyway...
I refer to using typed commands in Linux.
With tar, I can use the option -t to get a list of a
tarred file's contents.
I can't however find such an option for zip, so I have
to go into GUI and click on the zip file to see the contents.
Am I missing that option, or isn't there one?
--
Dieter Britz

On 2/16/23 07:57, db wrote:
> This might be the wrong ng but anyway...
> I refer to using typed commands in Linux.
> With tar, I can use the option -t to get a list of a
> tarred file's contents.
> I can't however find such an option for zip, so I have
> to go into GUI and click on the zip file to see the contents.
> Am I missing that option,  or isn't there one?

Oh there is one but the option is -h ands you can see the result.

[bliss@box ~]$ zip -h
Copyright (c) 1990-2008 Info-ZIP - Type 'zip "-L"' for software license.
Zip 3.0 (July 5th 2008). Usage:
zip [-options] [-b path] [-t mmddyyyy] [-n suffixes] [zipfile list] [-xi
list]
The default action is to add or replace zipfile entries from list, which
can include the special name - to compress standard input.
If zipfile and list are omitted, zip compresses stdin to stdout.
-f freshen: only changed files -u update: only changed or new files
-d delete entries in zipfile -m move into zipfile (delete OS
files)
-r recurse into directories -j junk (don't record) directory
names
-0 store only -l convert LF to CR LF (-ll CR LF
to LF)
-1 compress faster -9 compress better
-q quiet operation -v verbose operation/print
version info
-c add one-line comments -z add zipfile comment
-@ read names from stdin -o make zipfile as old as latest
entry
-x exclude the following names -i include only the following names
-F fix zipfile (-FF try harder) -D do not add directory entries
-A adjust self-extracting exe -J junk zipfile prefix (unzipsfx)
-T test zipfile integrity -X eXclude eXtra file attributes
-y store symbolic links as the link instead of the referenced file
-e encrypt -n don't compress these suffixes
-h2 show more help

The -h option is short for help. No doubt an artifact
of the English language dominance in early computer development.

bliss - on the ever-faithful Dell Latitude E7450, PCLinuxOS 2022
KDE Plasma 5.27.0 Kernel Version: 6.1.12-pclos1 (64-bit)
KDE Frameworks 5.102.0 - Qt Version: 5.15.6
Graphics : X11 - Mesa Intel® HD Graphics 5500
15.5 GiB of RAM CPU 4 × Intel® Core™ i7-5600U CPU @ 2.60GHz
Actually 2 real cores and 2 virtual cores.

--
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

On Thu, 16 Feb 2023 16:57:59 +0100, db wrote:

> This might be the wrong ng but anyway...
> I refer to using typed commands in Linux.
> With tar, I can use the option -t to get a list of a tarred file's
> contents.
> I can't however find such an option for zip, so I have to go into GUI
> and click on the zip file to see the contents.
> Am I missing that option, or isn't there one?

The capability of /listing/ the contents of a zip package is relegated
to the unzip(1) command; zip(1) only creates or updates zip packages.

The manpage for unzip(1) says...

UNZIP(1L) UNZIP(1L)
NAME
unzip - list, test and extract compressed files in a ZIP archive
SYNOPSIS
unzip [-Z] [-cflptTuvz[abjnoqsCDKLMUVWX$/:^]] file[.zip]
[file(s) ...] [-x xfile(s) ...] [-d exdir]

DESCRIPTION
unzip will list, test, or extract files from a ZIP archive, commonly
found on MS-DOS systems.

...

OPTIONS
...
-l list archive files (short format). The names, uncompressed
file sizes and modification dates and times of the specified
files are printed, along with totals for all files
specified. ...
...
-v list archive files (verbose format) or show diagnostic version
info. This option has evolved and now behaves as both an option
and a modifier. As an option it has two purposes: when a zip-
file is specified with no other options, -v lists archive
files verbosely, adding to the basic -l info the compression
method, compressed size, compression ratio and 32-bit CRC. ...

So, use unzip(1) to obtain a list of the files in your zip archive.

HTH
--
Lew Pitcher
"In Skills We Trust"

At Thu, 16 Feb 2023 16:57:59 +0100 db <dieterhansbritz@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> This might be the wrong ng but anyway...
> I refer to using typed commands in Linux.
> With tar, I can use the option -t to get a list of a
> tarred file's contents.
> I can't however find such an option for zip, so I have
> to go into GUI and click on the zip file to see the contents.
> Am I missing that option, or isn't there one?

Use unzip:

unzip -l file.zip
OR
unzip -v file.zip

(-v is a more verbose listing, with more detail)

Zip only *builds* zip archives, Unzip extracts, tests, and lists zip archives.

'man unzip' for more details.

--
Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364
Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
heller@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services

On Thu, 16 Feb 2023 16:51:58 +0000, Robert Heller wrote:
>
> At Thu, 16 Feb 2023 16:57:59 +0100 db <dieterhansbritz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> This might be the wrong ng but anyway...
>> I refer to using typed commands in Linux.
>> With tar, I can use the option -t to get a list of a
>> tarred file's contents.
>> I can't however find such an option for zip, so I have
>> to go into GUI and click on the zip file to see the contents.
>> Am I missing that option, or isn't there one?
>
> Use unzip:
>
> unzip -l file.zip
> OR
> unzip -v file.zip
>
> (-v is a more verbose listing, with more detail)

Didn't knew about -v (not really needed it), always used -l.
--
Andreas

On 2023-02-16, db wrote:

> This might be the wrong ng but anyway...
> I refer to using typed commands in Linux.
> With tar, I can use the option -t to get a list of a
> tarred file's contents.
> I can't however find such an option for zip, so I have
> to go into GUI and click on the zip file to see the contents.
> Am I missing that option, or isn't there one?

I didn't see it mentioned yet, so: besides the mentioned unzip, there's
also tar from libarchive/BSD (on this system, it's installed as
"bsdtar"), with which you could use tar's -t on a zip file.

(In the zip utilities, there's also zipinfo. The online manual says this
and unzip are the same program, although their options are different. Is
there any reason to choose one over the other when listing files in an
archive?)

--
Nuno Silva

On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 05:44:18 -0500, Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> (In the zip utilities, there's also zipinfo. The online manual says this
> and unzip are the same program, although their options are different. Is
> there any reason to choose one over the other when listing files in an
> archive?)

/usr/bin/zipinfo and /usr/bin/unzip are the same physical file, using a hard link.
[dave@x3 ~]$ stat /usr/bin/unzip|grep Inode
Device: 812h/2066d Inode: 2907388 Links: 2
[dave@x3 ~]$ stat /usr/bin/zipinfo|grep Inode
Device: 812h/2066d Inode: 2907388 Links: 2

From man unzip ...
SYNOPSIS
unzip [-Z] [-cflptTuvz[abjnoqsCDKLMUVWX$/:^]] file[.zip] [file(s) ...] [-x xfile(s) ...] [-d exdir]
From man zipinfo
SYNOPSIS
zipinfo [-12smlvhMtTz] file[.zip] [file(s) ...] [-x xfile(s) ...]

unzip -Z [-12smlvhMtTz] file[.zip] [file(s) ...] [-x xfile(s) ...]

Using zipinfo is interpreted the same as using "unzip -Z". There are no other
differences according to the synopsis in the man page for zipinfo.

The reason for the differences between the two man pages, is that the man page
for zipinfo only shows the unzip options that are relevant to listing information
about the archive.

Which to use depends on personal preferences. Do you prefer typing "unzip -Z"
or typing "zipinfo"?

As to why it's done this way, I don't know. Could be that at one time they
were two different programs, or it could be that zipinfo was added as easier
to remember then using "unzip -Z". You'd have to dig into the history to find
that out.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

At Fri, 17 Feb 2023 10:41:18 -0500 "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

>
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 05:44:18 -0500, Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> > (In the zip utilities, there's also zipinfo. The online manual says this
> > and unzip are the same program, although their options are different. Is
> > there any reason to choose one over the other when listing files in an
> > archive?)
>
> /usr/bin/zipinfo and /usr/bin/unzip are the same physical file, using a hard link.
> [dave@x3 ~]$ stat /usr/bin/unzip|grep Inode
> Device: 812h/2066d Inode: 2907388 Links: 2
> [dave@x3 ~]$ stat /usr/bin/zipinfo|grep Inode
> Device: 812h/2066d Inode: 2907388 Links: 2
>
> From man unzip ...
> SYNOPSIS
> unzip [-Z] [-cflptTuvz[abjnoqsCDKLMUVWX$/:^]] file[.zip] [file(s) ...] [-x xfile(s) ...] [-d exdir]
> From man zipinfo
> SYNOPSIS
> zipinfo [-12smlvhMtTz] file[.zip] [file(s) ...] [-x xfile(s) ...]
>
> unzip -Z [-12smlvhMtTz] file[.zip] [file(s) ...] [-x xfile(s) ...]
>
> Using zipinfo is interpreted the same as using "unzip -Z". There are no other
> differences according to the synopsis in the man page for zipinfo.
>
> The reason for the differences between the two man pages, is that the man page
> for zipinfo only shows the unzip options that are relevant to listing information
> about the archive.
>
> Which to use depends on personal preferences. Do you prefer typing "unzip -Z"
> or typing "zipinfo"?
>
> As to why it's done this way, I don't know. Could be that at one time they
> were two different programs, or it could be that zipinfo was added as easier
> to remember then using "unzip -Z". You'd have to dig into the history to find
> that out.

Zip / Unzip have a bit of a history and came from outside of the UNIX world
(they originated in the MS-DOS world). I suspect that due to MS-DOS memory /
disk limitations the *original* programs for Zip files had to be limited to
single functions (just building the zip file, just extracting, just listing,
etc.). Along with a different philosophy about how to organize software.

Tar originated in the UNIX world, and even though the original UNIXes were on
16-machines (PDP-11), there was less memory constraints. Also, tar (even
today) does not include the compression/decompression code -- that is handled
by separate programs via a pipe, so tar's core code was/is fairly small.

>
> Regards, Dave Hodgins
>
>

--
Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364
Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
heller@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services

On 2023-02-17 17:28, Robert Heller wrote:
> At Fri, 17 Feb 2023 10:41:18 -0500 "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 05:44:18 -0500, Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>> Using zipinfo is interpreted the same as using "unzip -Z". There are no other
>> differences according to the synopsis in the man page for zipinfo.
>>
>> The reason for the differences between the two man pages, is that the man page
>> for zipinfo only shows the unzip options that are relevant to listing information
>> about the archive.
>>
>> Which to use depends on personal preferences. Do you prefer typing "unzip -Z"
>> or typing "zipinfo"?
>>
>> As to why it's done this way, I don't know. Could be that at one time they
>> were two different programs, or it could be that zipinfo was added as easier
>> to remember then using "unzip -Z". You'd have to dig into the history to find
>> that out.
>
> Zip / Unzip have a bit of a history and came from outside of the UNIX world
> (they originated in the MS-DOS world). I suspect that due to MS-DOS memory /
> disk limitations the *original* programs for Zip files had to be limited to
> single functions (just building the zip file, just extracting, just listing,
> etc.). Along with a different philosophy about how to organize software.

Er... that's not my remembrance. I recall a single program, called
"pkzip". Maybe there was an older zip/unzip, but what we used before
pkzip was another format, arc.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PKZIP>

PKZIP is a file archiving computer program, notable for introducing the
popular ZIP file format. PKZIP was first introduced for MS-DOS on the
IBM-PC compatible platform in 1989. Since then versions have been
released for a number of other architectures and operating systems.
PKZIP was originally written by Phil Katz and marketed by his company
PKWARE, Inc starting in 1986. The company bears his initials: 'PK'.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARC_(file_format)>

They mention pkarc.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Katz#PKARC_and_PKWARE>

> Tar originated in the UNIX world, and even though the original UNIXes were on
> 16-machines (PDP-11), there was less memory constraints. Also, tar (even
> today) does not include the compression/decompression code -- that is handled
> by separate programs via a pipe, so tar's core code was/is fairly small.

and tar.gz is vulnerable. A single byte error in the archive file, and
the entire thing is lost.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 2023-02-17, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> On 2023-02-17 17:28, Robert Heller wrote:
>
>> Zip / Unzip have a bit of a history and came from outside of the UNIX world
>> (they originated in the MS-DOS world). I suspect that due to MS-DOS memory /
>> disk limitations the *original* programs for Zip files had to be limited to
>> single functions (just building the zip file, just extracting, just listing,
>> etc.). Along with a different philosophy about how to organize software.
>
> Er... that's not my remembrance. I recall a single program, called
> "pkzip". Maybe there was an older zip/unzip, but what we used before
> pkzip was another format, arc.

I recall there being two separate programs, PKZIP.EXE and PKUNZIP.EXE.
In fact, I just dug around on my system and found them both. They're
dated 1993-02-01.

> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PKZIP>

Note that the label on the floppy disk in the photo mentions
both PKZIP and PKUNZIP.

That's not to say that there wasn't a later version of PKZIP
that could both zip and unzip, but I never saw one.

I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
(Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)

And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
tar, cpio, gzip...

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On 2/17/23 11:32, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2023-02-17, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-02-17 17:28, Robert Heller wrote:
>>
>>> Zip / Unzip have a bit of a history and came from outside of the UNIX world
>>> (they originated in the MS-DOS world). I suspect that due to MS-DOS memory /
>>> disk limitations the *original* programs for Zip files had to be limited to
>>> single functions (just building the zip file, just extracting, just listing,
>>> etc.). Along with a different philosophy about how to organize software.
>>
>> Er... that's not my remembrance. I recall a single program, called
>> "pkzip". Maybe there was an older zip/unzip, but what we used before
>> pkzip was another format, arc.
>
> I recall there being two separate programs, PKZIP.EXE and PKUNZIP.EXE.
> In fact, I just dug around on my system and found them both. They're
> dated 1993-02-01.
>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PKZIP>
>
> Note that the label on the floppy disk in the photo mentions
> both PKZIP and PKUNZIP.
>
> That's not to say that there wasn't a later version of PKZIP
> that could both zip and unzip, but I never saw one.
>
> I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
> formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
> world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
> (Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)
>
> And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
> tar, cpio, gzip...
>

And in the Amiga sphere we used .lzh and .lha which were pretty
good but before I could get a shareware full version the creator took a
job with Microsoft. We also had zip but preferred usually the Lha which
had no problem creating a file that would unpack itself.

bliss -“Nearly any fool can use a GNU/Linux computer. Many do.” After
all here I am... Again.

--
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

On 2023-02-17 20:32, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2023-02-17, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2023-02-17 17:28, Robert Heller wrote:
>>
>>> Zip / Unzip have a bit of a history and came from outside of the UNIX world
>>> (they originated in the MS-DOS world). I suspect that due to MS-DOS memory /
>>> disk limitations the *original* programs for Zip files had to be limited to
>>> single functions (just building the zip file, just extracting, just listing,
>>> etc.). Along with a different philosophy about how to organize software.
>>
>> Er... that's not my remembrance. I recall a single program, called
>> "pkzip". Maybe there was an older zip/unzip, but what we used before
>> pkzip was another format, arc.
>
> I recall there being two separate programs, PKZIP.EXE and PKUNZIP.EXE.
> In fact, I just dug around on my system and found them both. They're
> dated 1993-02-01.
>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PKZIP>
>
> Note that the label on the floppy disk in the photo mentions
> both PKZIP and PKUNZIP.

Ah. My memory must be wrong, then.

>
> That's not to say that there wasn't a later version of PKZIP
> that could both zip and unzip, but I never saw one.
>
> I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
> formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
> world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
> (Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)
>
> And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
> tar, cpio, gzip...

I don't know about Unix, but I found the capabilities in Linux more
limited than in Dos, around 1998.

For example, I could not write an archive spanning several floppies,
because zip could not break on an exact byte count. It had to break on
complete files.

On the other hand, "less" could handle gzipped text files transparently,
no need to decompress for reading. Very nice for log files.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 2023-02-17 20:56, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 2/17/23 11:32, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2023-02-17, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-02-17 17:28, Robert Heller wrote:

....

>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PKZIP>
>>
>> Note that the label on the floppy disk in the photo mentions
>> both PKZIP and PKUNZIP.
>>
>> That's not to say that there wasn't a later version of PKZIP
>> that could both zip and unzip, but I never saw one.
>>
>> I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
>> formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
>> world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
>> (Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)
>>
>> And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
>> tar, cpio, gzip...
>>
>
>     And in the Amiga sphere we used .lzh and .lha which were pretty
> good but before I could get a shareware full version the creator took a
> job with Microsoft.  We also had zip but preferred usually the Lha which
> had no problem creating a file that would unpack itself.

I liked RAR better.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 2/16/23 11:12 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 2/16/23 07:57, db wrote:
>> This might be the wrong ng but anyway...
>> I refer to using typed commands in Linux.
>> With tar, I can use the option -t to get a list of a
>> tarred file's contents.
>> I can't however find such an option for zip, so I have
>> to go into GUI and click on the zip file to see the contents.
>> Am I missing that option,  or isn't there one?
>
> Oh there is one but the option is -h ands you can see the result.
>
>
> [bliss@box ~]$ zip -h
> Copyright (c) 1990-2008 Info-ZIP - Type 'zip "-L"' for software license.
> Zip 3.0 (July 5th 2008). Usage:
> zip [-options] [-b path] [-t mmddyyyy] [-n suffixes] [zipfile list] [-xi
> list]
>   The default action is to add or replace zipfile entries from list, which
>   can include the special name - to compress standard input.
>   If zipfile and list are omitted, zip compresses stdin to stdout.
>   -f   freshen: only changed files  -u   update: only changed or new files
>   -d   delete entries in zipfile    -m   move into zipfile (delete OS
> files)
>   -r   recurse into directories     -j   junk (don't record) directory
> names
>   -0   store only                   -l   convert LF to CR LF (-ll CR LF
> to LF)
>   -1   compress faster              -9   compress better
>   -q   quiet operation              -v   verbose operation/print
> version info
>   -c   add one-line comments        -z   add zipfile comment
>   -@   read names from stdin        -o   make zipfile as old as latest
> entry
>   -x   exclude the following names  -i   include only the following names
>   -F   fix zipfile (-FF try harder) -D   do not add directory entries
>   -A   adjust self-extracting exe   -J   junk zipfile prefix (unzipsfx)
>   -T   test zipfile integrity       -X   eXclude eXtra file attributes
>   -y   store symbolic links as the link instead of the referenced file
>   -e   encrypt                      -n   don't compress these suffixes
>   -h2  show more help
>
>     The -h option is short for help.  No doubt an artifact
> of the English language dominance in early computer development.

7-zip is better than old-fashioned zip and ALMOST as
portable these days. You can easily get 7-zip for
linux and Winders.

If you're into Python you can use one of its ZIP
libraries to create/fill a zip file. First you
create the 'container', the zip file, then you
stuff files into it.

Note that "real" zips MAY have size limitations -
used to be about 2gb though the more recent versions
seem to be able to do more. 7-zips can be as big
as your disk is. Same goes for the linux-centric
".gz" and ".bz" files. Winders DOES have an easy
".gz" utility ... next to pure old-fashioned zips
I'd say they're the "most portable".

".tar.gz" seems to still be very popular for
mass storage. The '.tar' (it used to mean
"tape archive"), just mashes files into one
file ... and the ".gz" tries to compress the
whole thing. This is NOT very efficient with
binary or especially encrypted files though
since they look like "binary white noise" and
the zipping algo's can't DO much with that
kind of data. If you are gonna try to compress
those, do it FIRST - before encryption/zipping.
Backups are one of My Things and I make a LOT
of those kinds of files.

On 17/02/2023 19:32, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
> formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
> world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
> (Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)
>
> And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
> tar, cpio, gzip...

RAR was my pet hate...

--
Climate is what you expect but weather is what you get.
Mark Twain

On 2023-02-18 11:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 17/02/2023 19:32, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
>> formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
>> world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
>> (Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)
>>
>> And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
>> tar, cpio, gzip...
>
> RAR was my pet hate...
>

Why? :-? :-o

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 18/02/2023 11:43, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2023-02-18 11:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 17/02/2023 19:32, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
>>> formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
>>> world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
>>> (Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)
>>>
>>> And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
>>> tar, cpio, gzip...
>>
>> RAR was my pet hate...
>>
>
> Why? :-?  :-o
>
Could never find an unpacking program that ran on Unix.

--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
...I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

At Sat, 18 Feb 2023 13:15:31 +0000 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>
> On 18/02/2023 11:43, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> > On 2023-02-18 11:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> >> On 17/02/2023 19:32, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> >>> I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
> >>> formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
> >>> world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
> >>> (Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)
> >>>
> >>> And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
> >>> tar, cpio, gzip...
> >>
> >> RAR was my pet hate...
> >>
> >
> > Why? :-?  :-o
> >
> Could never find an unpacking program that ran on Unix.

Like zip, rar came from outside the UNIX world, so there is unrar.

>

--
Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364
Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
heller@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services

On 2023-02-18 14:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 18/02/2023 11:43, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2023-02-18 11:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 17/02/2023 19:32, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
>>>> formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
>>>> world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
>>>> (Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)
>>>>
>>>> And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
>>>> tar, cpio, gzip...
>>>
>>> RAR was my pet hate...
>>>
>>
>> Why? :-?  :-o
>>
> Could never find an unpacking program that ran on Unix.

:-O

unrar.

Unix, or Linux?

cer@Telcontar:~> whatis unrar
unrar (1) - extract, test, and view RAR archives
cer@Telcontar:~> rpm -qi unrar
Name : unrar
Version : 6.1.6
Release : lp154.1.1
Architecture: x86_64
Install Date: 2022-11-29T21:26:35 CET
Group : Productivity/Archiving/Compression
Size : 315707
License : NonFree
Signature : RSA/SHA256, 2022-05-11T13:38:46 CEST, Key ID b88b2fd43dbdc284
Source RPM : unrar-6.1.6-lp154.1.1.src.rpm
Build Date : 2022-05-11T13:38:41 CEST
Build Host : sheep85
Relocations : (not relocatable)
Packager : https://bugs.opensuse.org
Vendor : openSUSE
URL : https://www.rarlab.com
Summary : A program to extract, test, and view RAR archives
Description :
The unRAR utility is a freeware program distributed with source code
and developed for extracting, testing, and viewing the contents of
archives created with the RAR archiver.
Distribution: openSUSE:Leap:15.4:NonFree
cer@Telcontar:~>

This is built, I understand, from the published sources. There is no
equivalent "rar" that is free to use. However, for openSUSE, we can get
"rar" from the packman external repository.

Notice the difference in the versions reported:

cer@Telcontar:~> unrar -v

UNRAR 6.11 freeware Copyright (c) 1993-2022 Alexander Roshal

Usage: unrar <command> -<switch 1> -<switch N> <archive> <files...>
<@listfiles...> <path_to_extract\>

<Commands>
e Extract files without archived paths
....
y Assume Yes on all queries
cer@Telcontar:~>

cer@Telcontar:~> rar -v

RAR 6.02 Copyright (c) 1993-2021 Alexander Roshal 11 Jun 2021
Trial version Type 'rar -?' for help

Usage: rar <command> -<switch 1> -<switch N> <archive> <files...>
<@listfiles...> <path_to_extract\>

<Commands>
a Add files to archive
c Add archive comment
ch Change archive parameters
....
cer@Telcontar:~>

The only problem with using "rar" in Linux is that it doesn't support
Linux filesystem attributes and permissions :-(

--
Cheers, Carlos.

with <vDQHL.690236$Tcw8.307288@fx10.iad> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2023-02-17, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2023-02-17 17:28, Robert Heller wrote:

>>> Zip / Unzip have a bit of a history and came from outside of the
>>> UNIX world (they originated in the MS-DOS world). I suspect that due
>>> to MS-DOS memory / disk limitations the *original* programs for Zip
>>> files had to be limited to single functions (just building the zip
>>> file, just extracting, just listing, etc.). Along with a different
>>> philosophy about how to organize software.
>> Er... that's not my remembrance. I recall a single program, called
>> "pkzip". Maybe there was an older zip/unzip, but what we used before
>> pkzip was another format, arc.
> I recall there being two separate programs, PKZIP.EXE and PKUNZIP.EXE.
> In fact, I just dug around on my system and found them both. They're
> dated 1993-02-01.
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PKZIP>
> Note that the label on the floppy disk in the photo mentions both
> PKZIP and PKUNZIP.

I cast doubts on memory constraints (think about it, makes no sense).
What The Industry had settled for was: fully functional executable with
restrictive license (with or without un-archiver functionality) and
freeware un-archiver.

*CUT*

p.s. I was huge fan of arj back then. It's all history now anyway.

--
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom

On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 03:59:16 -0500, 25B.R866 wrote:
>
> 7-zip is better than old-fashioned zip and ALMOST as
> portable these days. You can easily get 7-zip for
> linux and Winders.

Possible.

But I notice some people send me a file with a ZIP extension. Often
turns out it's 7-zip, so "unzip" fails. I have 7z installed though and it
works. Would be nice though if (un)zip not just fails in these cases, but
uses 7z then. Otherwise I have to let 7z do it.
--
Andreas

On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 10:12:13 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> On 17/02/2023 19:32, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
>> formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
>> world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
>> (Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)
>> And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
>> tar, cpio, gzip...
>
> RAR was my pet hate...

Try lha. ;-)
--
Andreas

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.
--
Andreas

On 2/18/23 4:16 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 03:59:16 -0500, 25B.R866 wrote:
>>
>> 7-zip is better than old-fashioned zip and ALMOST as
>> portable these days. You can easily get 7-zip for
>> linux and Winders.
>
> Possible.
>
> But I notice some people send me a file with a ZIP extension. Often
> turns out it's 7-zip, so "unzip" fails. I have 7z installed though and it
> works. Would be nice though if (un)zip not just fails in these cases, but
> uses 7z then. Otherwise I have to let 7z do it.

PROPERLY, you use the ".7z" extension when making
zips with p7. Not everybody does that however.

It IS a good, efficient and versatile compression
utility. IMHO it should replace olde-tyme .zip
but I know it won't.

I haven't even tried with Win-11 yet ... does it
recognize, and properly handle, .tar.gz/.tar.bz2 ???
They kind of sneaked in support for common -ix
archive/compression schemes over the years.

On 18/02/2023 16:39, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2023-02-18 14:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 18/02/2023 11:43, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-02-18 11:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 17/02/2023 19:32, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>> I was becoming so tired of the proliferation of file archiving
>>>>> formats (ARC, ZOO, ARJ, etc.) that I was relieved to see the
>>>>> world finally settle on ZIP as a standard archiving format.
>>>>> (Uh-oh, here comes 7Zip...)
>>>>>
>>>>> And this is all separate from the Unix world, which had
>>>>> tar, cpio, gzip...
>>>>
>>>> RAR was my pet hate...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why? :-?  :-o
>>>
>> Could never find an unpacking program that ran on Unix.
>
> :-O
>
>
> unrar.
>
> Unix, or Linux?
>
Unix.
I cant remember when Linux first appeared on the desktops - I believe
that Mr Kettlewell was among the first in our company to espouse it, but
it was preceded by a lot of SCO Unix and SUNoS .

Curiously the advent of wide area networking and ultimately the Internet
propelled both the RAR format and Linux into popularity. It is hard to
see how co-operative development of Linux would have taken place without
the Internet and the ability to download and upload files globally, and
the need for RAR was IIRC driven by the first 'torrents' of pirated
software...

Anyway, for a long time it remained a DOS/WIN only program.

--
I would rather have questions that cannot be answered...
....than to have answers that cannot be questioned

Richard Feynman