Hi, On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Bernd Blaauw <bbla...@home.nl> wrote: > Op 21-8-2012 22:17, Rugxulo schreef: > >> Honestly, I'm all for .7z, but Jim and pals around here seem to prefer >> .ZIP (pseudo "standard"). Which isn't so bad when we're dealing with >> normal-sized files. For big stuff, I'd want better compression: >> >> http://lzip.nongnu.org/benchmark.txt > > XZ (LZMA2) could be an option. Unfortunately, platform requirements and > compatibility are hardly ever mentioned. > See http://tukaani.org/xz/
I'm not up on all the details of the millions of file format variations of LZMA, LZMA2, 7-Zip, Lzip, XZ, etc. (I doubt anyone is.) I think .7z doesn't save *nix permissions and hence that's why it's not preferred for them. (For us, it probably doesn't matter.) Though you can .tar.7z, but I guess most don't. Anyways, the dictionary size is customizable (unlike ZIP), so you can get as weak or strong compression as you want (up to reasonable limits). So memory requirements vary, but it usually doesn't matter except with fairly big (several MB) files, which are rare for FreeDOS. A few years ago I tested 7-Zip on my 486. It was smaller and faster than almost anything, so it was a clear winner, not to mention being open source and (more or less) portable. There's nothing wrong with .ZIP, but .7z is clearly superior, at least on 386+ machines. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
