Dag Wieers wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2011, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
>
>> Sven Aluoor wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:58 PM, Scott Robbins<scottro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As was mentioned, rpmforge has it. For what it's worth, p7zip does the
>>>> same thing and somewhat more quickly at least in my very rough
>>>> benchmarks, e.g. time rar e something.rar vs 7z e something rar.
>>>
>>> Did I understand right? "7z x" can unrar multipart *.rar archives
>>> faster than unrar nonfree? How is the CLI syntax?
>>
>> I doubt that, given it seems to be the same code:
>> "The decompression engine for RAR archives was developed using source
>> code of unRAR program."
>
> To the contrary, I would even argue that if you base your implementation
> on someone else's sourcecode, your implementation is at least as good, but
> potentially better than the original.
>
> Because when rewriting you have to understand the original, so
> re-implementing provides you with the opportunity to improve. And since
> you have to verify it works exactly the same, there's a good chance both
> performance and correctness are guaranteed.
>
> The original author may not have a reference to compete against.
the way it's phrased on that license page, it seemed to me that the
7-zip authors had just reused the unrar code as is. But you're right,
they may have optimized it and if so they would have had an easier time
than the original unrar author.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
