No matter what yo udo with the copyrighted work, if you're not copying it, you're not infringing on copyright. They did the copying, using their reserved right to do so. purchased copy of some proprietary software) the entity which distributed that to you was the copyright-holding purveyor. I don't fully understand it myself, because if you have a copy of the work (e.g. RAR is still cool and my 17 year old licence is still valid.
So, who cares -) Even I use Borg for my backups these days, since I don't have to care about a bus factor any more. Most if not all consumer OSs can open and create. RAR has everything included, and I felt it had a low bus factor. Where a copied jpg had reversed colours in the middle.
I have also seen bit flips on USB-Sticks. There where weeks, when all seven archives had and error! Disk, NFS, USB-Stick didn't mater. I had a cronjob that checked the tar.gz-Backups from the past week and there was a 50% change of "Unexpected EOF in archive". Because tar has no index, if something bad comes along, everything after that can't be read.) 17 years ago, I took a deep dive into rar and replaced my tar.gz backup process with it. The reason I'm a RAR fan is because TAR failed me multiple times! (The first one was ~21 years ago. Tar is a bit over engineered for the simple use cases. It's the reason zip is so popular, it doesn't support that at all. Where it gets weird of course is with things like file permissions and other linux specific stuff like user and group ids. Of course most of the archive/zip ui tools out there would support tar files anyway. The main downside is that tar files are less common on windows and the whole double file extension thing confuses people with file managers that hide them (i.e. It supports a few more compression algorithms of course. I'd probably use tar with bzip2, 7zip, or even gzip compression.
I'm old enough to remember PKZip being a new thing :-).įor as an actual backup format, tar is a common alternative. With zip files this also used to be a thing that some tools supported. Less of an issue these days but of course browsers don't support this. That is convenient when downloading over a slow/unstable connection (or if you don't know how to resume an aborted download with wget or ftp). This used to be common with rar and I think 7zip also supports this. Where things get tricky is splitting the resulting archive in multiple files. I think for the common use case of distributing giga bytes of data in a reasonably efficient way, 7zip is fine (e.g.
0 kommentar(er)
