If this isn't exactly what you wanted, please try our Search (there's a LOT of techy and non-techy stuff here about Linux, Unix, Mac OS X and just computers in general!):
From: Jeff Hyman <email@example.com> Subject: Re: big Unix file to dos Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:49:12 GMT Recently, Robert Carnegie wrote: > Jeff Hyman <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message news:<m16DnKt-0007LpC@cactus.com>... > > Recently, Rob S wrote: > > > On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:02:21 GMT, Jean-Pierre Radley <email@example.com> wrote: > > > > > > - > > > -Why in the world would you use zip instead of gzip, or, still better, > > > -bzip2? > > > > > > It works. > > > It's compatible with PKZIP on DOS > > > Ditto Winzip > > > Freeware > > > Has every option I need (other than spanning disks) > > > Openserver ready-compiled versions are easily available on the 'net > > > It would do what the original poster asked > > > > > > Do the other progs you mention fulfill all these criteria and do spanning JP? > > > > > > regards > > > -Rob > > > robatwork at mail dot com > > > > If you need to span disks, try DOS-TAR. Has compression and > > bit-level verification too. > > > > Jeff Hyman > > This one? https://www.cactus.com/products/cactus/dostar.html > Interesting and potentially useful, though you can't but mock this: > "Data compression guarantees to at least double the capacity of any > seeking device such as floppy or a named file on your hard disk." > > And perhaps too much effort if you only have to do it once - > although if the file is commercially important then getting a > quick solution is better than getting a cheap one. > > Of course there are many dozens of disk spanners for DOS or Windows, > although I got stuck when looking for one particular feature for > archiving - _redundant_ disk spanning. [snips rambling about CRCs > across volumes to create a checksum disk, crypto one-time-pad tools] > > And come to think, any DOS tool which can grab images of diskettes > would copy the data off basic UNIX tar disks, with only the 512 bytes > header as added nuisance (plus if you're not using tar then you don't > know where end-of-file is). Windows InfoZip, for one, seems happy to > ignore a tar header when reading a "tar cvAf" archive, and get to the > zipped data inside; so apparently you could use any UNIX zip tool, > "tar cvA6" to write disks, any DOS/Windows diskette imager, the DOS > "copy" command to reassemble pieces, and any DOS/Windows unzipper, > to transfer data. > > As far as I know, this wouldn't be the same as PK Zip disk spanning; > I believe that that uses regular files on MS-DOS formatted diskettes, > and tar of course just dumps data onto the medium from sector zero on > (well, data from sector one). > > I haven't taken the trouble to get acquainted with gzip and bzip2 > beyond knowing the names - for managing our fleet of servers, and given > some logistical and contractual issues, neither is a good fit for us - > and when I Googled them I glimpsed the word "incompatible" in relevant > texts, which, while not absolute, suggested "more trouble than it's > worth for a one-off job by a novice - don't bring it up". So I stopped > at suggesting uuencode, ASCII split, and doscp as my all-SCO solution. I watched this thread for some time before making a comment. Bottom line is DOS-TAR _does_ span floppies. If compressing Ascii text will reduce number of floppies by 80+ %. It's also compatible with all the super-tars UNIX <--> DOS. It's no big deal as I was just making a suggestion and not trying to make a sales pitch. Any solution that is free on the web will usually get my vote too.
- Jeff Hyman
Got something to add? Send me email.