Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
On Wednesday 17 August 2005 10:55 am, Kirk Strauser wrote: On Friday 12 August 2005 23:58, Jerry McBride wrote: What you're seeing are the results of compressing /lib on my gentoo powered laptop. For comparison purposes, what compression levels did you specify for bz2 and gz? -- Kirk Strauser hi Kirk, It's been a couple of days, but I do believe I used -9 and -9 -- ** Registered Linux User Number 185956 FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004 Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00! 4:55pm up 30 days, 16:54, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
Nick Rout wrote: On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 09:36 -0400, Jerry McBride wrote: On Saturday 13 August 2005 01:32 am, Nick Rout wrote: On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 00:58 -0400, Jerry McBride wrote: Anyone else here subscribe to the LINUX JOURNAL? In the September issue there's a neat article titled tha same as the subject line of this message. The skinny is, there's some really nice file compressors out there and I never heard of two of them... Anyone else know about LZMA or 7ZA? The two mentioned compression tools work pretty much like gzip. You tar up your files, pipe to the compression filter and then on to the target file. Below is a small example of what I've been seeing here at the shack. -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12359680 Aug 12 23:57 backup.tar -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3536665 Aug 13 00:01 backup.tar.7z -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4438465 Aug 13 00:08 backup.tar.bz2 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4747637 Aug 13 00:03 backup.tar.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2731412 Aug 13 00:10 backup.tar.lzma -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5125474 Aug 13 00:16 backup.tar.lzop What you're seeing are the results of compressing /lib on my gentoo powered laptop. I've not bothered with timing the processes as the better compression rates are at the cost of speed and memory usage. Not good for while you wait processing, but just plain perfect for backups and what-have-you on servers... One side note, 7za does not record user/group info... Are you saying it removes user/group info from the tar file? Not removed, it's never put there... :') I'm sorry but how do you create a tar file without preserving the usernames and permissions? This may be a case of a different paradigm being used by 7-zip than that used by traditional (*nix) compression tools. If my memory serves me, the 7-zip format is very similar to the pkzip format in its usage. By that I mean that one is not required to make a tarball before compressing multiple files. The format allows you to skip the tar step and make an archive consisting of whichever files and directories you wish. The problem, I'm guessing, is that the 7-zip archive format was developed in the Windows world where users and groups and permissions have no meaning (I think that has changed or is changing in the NT/XP world, but I don't know and don't especially care). Hence, these attributes aren't accomodated by this format. I assume the 7-zip extractor program sets the user and group of the extracted files to that of whomever extracts them. What everyone has rightly pointed out, namely that you can make a tarball and then compress that, is exactly right. That IS how one would use 7-zip with a proper operating system. The original poster most likely used the 7-zip archiver as a stand-alone tool, rather than using it in conjunction with tar. This is not altogether surprising as one typically compresses a directory with a single tar command (and an implied pipe) rather than explicitly piping the output of tar to the compression utility. Since there is no --7-zip switch in tar, the OP couldn't simply 'tar -7cf backup.tar.7zip lib/'. The OP probably simply 7-zipped his directory without tarring it first and consequently ran into the limitations of the archive format. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
Matt Randolph wrote: Nick Rout wrote: On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 09:36 -0400, Jerry McBride wrote: On Saturday 13 August 2005 01:32 am, Nick Rout wrote: On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 00:58 -0400, Jerry McBride wrote: Anyone else here subscribe to the LINUX JOURNAL? In the September issue there's a neat article titled tha same as the subject line of this message. The skinny is, there's some really nice file compressors out there and I never heard of two of them... Anyone else know about LZMA or 7ZA? The two mentioned compression tools work pretty much like gzip. You tar up your files, pipe to the compression filter and then on to the target file. Below is a small example of what I've been seeing here at the shack. -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12359680 Aug 12 23:57 backup.tar -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3536665 Aug 13 00:01 backup.tar.7z -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4438465 Aug 13 00:08 backup.tar.bz2 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4747637 Aug 13 00:03 backup.tar.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2731412 Aug 13 00:10 backup.tar.lzma -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5125474 Aug 13 00:16 backup.tar.lzop What you're seeing are the results of compressing /lib on my gentoo powered laptop. I've not bothered with timing the processes as the better compression rates are at the cost of speed and memory usage. Not good for while you wait processing, but just plain perfect for backups and what-have-you on servers... One side note, 7za does not record user/group info... Are you saying it removes user/group info from the tar file? Not removed, it's never put there... :') I'm sorry but how do you create a tar file without preserving the usernames and permissions? This may be a case of a different paradigm being used by 7-zip than that used by traditional (*nix) compression tools. If my memory serves me, the 7-zip format is very similar to the pkzip format in its usage. By that I mean that one is not required to make a tarball before compressing multiple files. The format allows you to skip the tar step and make an archive consisting of whichever files and directories you wish. The problem, I'm guessing, is that the 7-zip archive format was developed in the Windows world where users and groups and permissions have no meaning (I think that has changed or is changing in the NT/XP world, but I don't know and don't especially care). Hence, these attributes aren't accomodated by this format. I assume the 7-zip extractor program sets the user and group of the extracted files to that of whomever extracts them. What everyone has rightly pointed out, namely that you can make a tarball and then compress that, is exactly right. That IS how one would use 7-zip with a proper operating system. The original poster most likely used the 7-zip archiver as a stand-alone tool, rather than using it in conjunction with tar. This is not altogether surprising as one typically compresses a directory with a single tar command (and an implied pipe) rather than explicitly piping the output of tar to the compression utility. Since there is no --7-zip switch in tar, the OP couldn't simply 'tar -7cf backup.tar.7zip lib/'. The OP probably simply 7-zipped his directory without tarring it first and consequently ran into the limitations of the archive format. -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3536665 Aug 13 00:01 backup.tar.7z Oops! I should read more carefully. -- Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate - W. of O. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
Matt Randolph wrote: Matt Randolph wrote: This may be a case of a different paradigm being used by 7-zip than that used by traditional (*nix) compression tools. If my memory serves me, the 7-zip format is very similar to the pkzip format in its usage. By that I mean that one is not required to make a tarball before compressing multiple files. The format allows you to skip the tar step and make an archive consisting of whichever files and directories you wish. The problem, I'm guessing, is that the 7-zip archive format was developed in the Windows world where users and groups and permissions have no meaning (I think that has changed or is changing in the NT/XP world, but I don't know and don't especially care). Hence, these attributes aren't accomodated by this format. I assume the 7-zip extractor program sets the user and group of the extracted files to that of whomever extracts them. What everyone has rightly pointed out, namely that you can make a tarball and then compress that, is exactly right. That IS how one would use 7-zip with a proper operating system. The original poster most likely used the 7-zip archiver as a stand-alone tool, rather than using it in conjunction with tar. This is not altogether surprising as one typically compresses a directory with a single tar command (and an implied pipe) rather than explicitly piping the output of tar to the compression utility. Since there is no --7-zip switch in tar, the OP couldn't simply 'tar -7cf backup.tar.7zip lib/'. The OP probably simply 7-zipped his directory without tarring it first and consequently ran into the limitations of the archive format. -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3536665 Aug 13 00:01 backup.tar.7z Oops! I should read more carefully. In an effort to put this matter to rest (and to save a little face), I have tested 7-zip. I created a directory containing two empty files. These files were then assigned arbitrary users and groups. Next I created a tarball of the directory. I changed the ownership of the tarball too. Finally, I 7-zipped the tarball. When I extracted the tarball it was given the user and group of the extractor (eg. myusername:users) rather than what it was assigned above. When I untarred the tarball, however, the contents were exactly as you would expect; they had the user and group settings that I assigned them previously. I once again feel that my original hypothesis is essentially correct. 7-zip doesn't support user, group and permission data because it was originally developed for Windows. But this is a limitation that can be worked around by making a tarball first. The OP noticed that the ownership and permissions of the tarball changed and made a comment about that. This fact has little relevance for most users since we will only care about the contents of the tarball, not the tarball itself. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 09:36 -0400, Jerry McBride wrote: On Saturday 13 August 2005 01:32 am, Nick Rout wrote: On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 00:58 -0400, Jerry McBride wrote: Anyone else here subscribe to the LINUX JOURNAL? In the September issue there's a neat article titled tha same as the subject line of this message. The skinny is, there's some really nice file compressors out there and I never heard of two of them... Anyone else know about LZMA or 7ZA? The two mentioned compression tools work pretty much like gzip. You tar up your files, pipe to the compression filter and then on to the target file. Below is a small example of what I've been seeing here at the shack. -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12359680 Aug 12 23:57 backup.tar -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3536665 Aug 13 00:01 backup.tar.7z -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4438465 Aug 13 00:08 backup.tar.bz2 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4747637 Aug 13 00:03 backup.tar.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2731412 Aug 13 00:10 backup.tar.lzma -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5125474 Aug 13 00:16 backup.tar.lzop What you're seeing are the results of compressing /lib on my gentoo powered laptop. I've not bothered with timing the processes as the better compression rates are at the cost of speed and memory usage. Not good for while you wait processing, but just plain perfect for backups and what-have-you on servers... One side note, 7za does not record user/group info... Are you saying it removes user/group info from the tar file? Not removed, it's never put there... :') I'm sorry but how do you create a tar file without preserving the usernames and permissions? -- ** Registered Linux User Number 185956 FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004 Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00! 9:42am up 26 days, 9:41, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
Hi, that lzma is quite impressive!! Is not my purpose to hijack this topic, but I was wondering if anyone is kind enough to give me some comments about linux magazines. I been looking into that for some time, but not enough to subscribe one, as I wish to do. I know about Linux Journal and Linux Magazine. Both seem good to me. What do you subscribe and why is that your preference? Cheers, FernandoOn 8/13/05, Jerry McBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone else here subscribe to the LINUX JOURNAL?In the September issue there's a neat article titled tha same as the subjectline of this message.The skinny is, there's some really nice file compressors out there and I never heard of two of them... Anyone else know about LZMA or 7ZA?The two mentioned compression tools work pretty much like gzip. You tar upyour files, pipe to the compression filter and then on to the target file. Below is a small example of what I've been seeing here at the shack.-rw-r--r--1 root root 12359680 Aug 12 23:57 backup.tar-rw-r--r--1 root root3536665 Aug 13 00:01 backup.tar.7z-rw-r--r--1 root root4438465 Aug 13 00:08 backup.tar.bz2-rw-r--r--1 root root4747637 Aug 13 00:03 backup.tar.gz-rw-r--r--1 root root2731412 Aug 13 00:10 backup.tar.lzma-rw-r--r--1 root root5125474 Aug 13 00:16 backup.tar.lzopWhat you're seeing are the results of compressing /lib on my gentoo powered laptop. I've not bothered with timing the processes as the better compressionrates are at the cost of speed and memory usage. Not good for while youwait processing, but just plain perfect for backups and what-have-you on servers... One side note, 7za does not record user/group info... It's a shametoo as this make it pretty much useless in most linux backup scenarios. Thislzma creature is simply awesome.You can find it at: http://martinus.geekisp.com/rublog.cgi/Projects/LZMACheers all--** Registered Linux User Number 185956FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004 Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.netBuy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00! 12:28amup 26 days, 27 min,1 user,load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00--gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 12:13 +, Fernando Meira wrote: Hi, that lzma is quite impressive!! Interesting, there is an .ebuild in the source too ;) It's not in portage, however. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
ive used lzma for a while in windows using 7zip but have not had much time to test it in linux using p7zip yet. (emerge p7zip) On 8/13/05, fire-eyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 12:13 +, Fernando Meira wrote: Hi, that lzma is quite impressive!! Interesting, there is an .ebuild in the source too ;) It's not in portage, however. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
fire-eyes wrote: Sounds like P7 doesn't have the capability to remember user names group names etc, definately a i'd try it killer for me. If it's anything like gzip or bzip2 then the compression algorithm does not need to support anything like usernames or groups. That stuff is handled by a separate program such as tar. Zac -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
Jerry McBride wrote: One side note, 7za does not record user/group info... It's a shame too as this make it pretty much useless in most linux backup scenarios. So what's the problem? You'll be using something like tar | 7z or whatever the command for lzma is. I mean, tar handles ownership and permissions. Or am I missing something? -- Norberto Bensa 4544-9692 / 15-4190-6344 Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina pgpKlO2wOXuXh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 11:49 -0300, Norberto Bensa wrote: So what's the problem? You'll be using something like tar | 7z or whatever the command for lzma is. I mean, tar handles ownership and permissions. Or am I missing something? I could be missing something, my brain isn't working right :) -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
Anyone else here subscribe to the LINUX JOURNAL? In the September issue there's a neat article titled tha same as the subject line of this message. The skinny is, there's some really nice file compressors out there and I never heard of two of them... Anyone else know about LZMA or 7ZA? The two mentioned compression tools work pretty much like gzip. You tar up your files, pipe to the compression filter and then on to the target file. Below is a small example of what I've been seeing here at the shack. -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12359680 Aug 12 23:57 backup.tar -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3536665 Aug 13 00:01 backup.tar.7z -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4438465 Aug 13 00:08 backup.tar.bz2 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4747637 Aug 13 00:03 backup.tar.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2731412 Aug 13 00:10 backup.tar.lzma -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5125474 Aug 13 00:16 backup.tar.lzop What you're seeing are the results of compressing /lib on my gentoo powered laptop. I've not bothered with timing the processes as the better compression rates are at the cost of speed and memory usage. Not good for while you wait processing, but just plain perfect for backups and what-have-you on servers... One side note, 7za does not record user/group info... It's a shame too as this make it pretty much useless in most linux backup scenarios. This lzma creature is simply awesome. You can find it at: http://martinus.geekisp.com/rublog.cgi/Projects/LZMA Cheers all -- ** Registered Linux User Number 185956 FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004 Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00! 12:28am up 26 days, 27 min, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 00:58 -0400, Jerry McBride wrote: Anyone else here subscribe to the LINUX JOURNAL? In the September issue there's a neat article titled tha same as the subject line of this message. The skinny is, there's some really nice file compressors out there and I never heard of two of them... Anyone else know about LZMA or 7ZA? The two mentioned compression tools work pretty much like gzip. You tar up your files, pipe to the compression filter and then on to the target file. Below is a small example of what I've been seeing here at the shack. -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12359680 Aug 12 23:57 backup.tar -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3536665 Aug 13 00:01 backup.tar.7z -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4438465 Aug 13 00:08 backup.tar.bz2 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4747637 Aug 13 00:03 backup.tar.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2731412 Aug 13 00:10 backup.tar.lzma -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5125474 Aug 13 00:16 backup.tar.lzop What you're seeing are the results of compressing /lib on my gentoo powered laptop. I've not bothered with timing the processes as the better compression rates are at the cost of speed and memory usage. Not good for while you wait processing, but just plain perfect for backups and what-have-you on servers... One side note, 7za does not record user/group info... Are you saying it removes user/group info from the tar file? It's a shame too as this make it pretty much useless in most linux backup scenarios. This lzma creature is simply awesome. You can find it at: http://martinus.geekisp.com/rublog.cgi/Projects/LZMA Cheers all -- ** Registered Linux User Number 185956 FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004 Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00! 12:28am up 26 days, 27 min, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Compression tools Compared
On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 00:58 -0400, Jerry McBride wrote: Anyone else here subscribe to the LINUX JOURNAL? In the September issue errr *grumble* yes but in this part of the world we actually get the september issue in september, not the start of august! -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
