Friendica Social Network

Jernej Simončič � 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

As a Windows user (and somebody who's been using 7-zip since 2002), I really don't see any point in .7z over .tar.xz – the size difference is minimal, and 7-zip handles both types anyway.

daniel:// stenberg:// 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

@jernej__s thank you, that's valuable input!

@Jernej Simončič �

Lapo Luchini 1 settimana fa friendica

It does need to "uncompress it twice" (once to remove .xz, once to extract .tar) though, but that'd be something for 7-zip to solve, not curl.

1

Jernej Simončič � 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

@lapo Yeah, this is something 7-zip should solve (eg. WinRAR already does this).

@Lapo Luchini

Wingy 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

@lapo @jernej__s Or just rename the file to a .txz. Then 7-zip should do it in one step.

@Lapo Luchini @Jernej Simončič �

Lapo Luchini 1 settimana fa friendica

Unfortunately, it seems not. Neither from the GUI nor from CLI.

% echo a>a
% echo b>b
% tar cJvf test.txz a b
% rm a b
% 7z.exe x test.txz
% ls
test.tar  test.txz

Wingy 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

@lapo @jernej__s Aw that’s sad! I thought that was how 7z worked but it looks like not.

@Lapo Luchini @Jernej Simončič �

1

maonu 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

@jernej__s 7-zip can offer parallel decompression.

Tar is quite outdated in this regard, in fact!

@Jernej Simončič �

daniel:// stenberg:// 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

@maonu @jernej__s I timed my tar xf. It takes 92 milliseconds. For whom is this a problem again?

@Jernej Simončič � @maonu

Matteꙮ Italia 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

agree with this; and if OTOH one wants to reduce file size for someone that only has .zip support, the alternative is to zip twice (no, really); once with "store"/"copy" compression (= no compression), one to actually compress, essentially emulating .tar.gz with .zip (so allowing compression across files); on my machine the generated .zip file (with 7z default options) is 3.9 MB compared to the 6.3 MB of the "regular" .zip.

Questa voce è stata modificata (1 settimana fa)

Jan Johannesson 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

No, not standard. Disk and network are still cheap. Not the guy who's using it.

Marcus Müller 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

don't, honestly. Realistically, the sizes don't matter for human downloaders (also not on the server side, most downloads probably are automated, and will probably be .tar.something), so adding more formats doesn't seem worth the effort. ZIP has one, and honestly, one advantage for Windows users: unlike .tar.xz it can be decompressed with board utilities, but what's the point in that? You end up with a source tarball, and then you install a toolchain that *almost certainly* includes tar.

Mynacol 1 settimana fa • akkoma (AP)

I'm also not convinced at all. Windows 11 now supports all sorts of archive formats out of the box (zip, tar, tar.gz, tar.bz2, tar.xz, tar.zst, 7z, rar). I'd rather look at zstd if you want to add a new (and potentially a better-compressed, fast) format.

daniel:// stenberg:// 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

@mynacol my zstd tests end up roughly the same size as with xz, so it does not seem worth it.

@Mynacol

highvoltage 1 settimana fa • pleroma (AP)

Yeah but zstd decompresses *significantly* faster, which is nice for everyone

daniel:// stenberg:// 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

my .tar.xz file decompresses in 92 milliseconds for me. I don't believe too many people will get bored before it completes.

Questa voce è stata modificata (1 settimana fa)

René Kijewski 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

manually compressing the .tar file with `xz --extreme --best curl-8.10.1.tar` already reduces the size from 2'766'260 to 2'644'404 bytes. The best 7z compression, `7z a -t7z -m0=lzma -mx=11`, generates roughly the same size: 2'643'431 bytes. So I don't think 7z is needed.

Questa voce è stata modificata (1 settimana fa)

Man2Dev :idle: 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

Considering the email, they do have valid points. The file size difference is significant enough, and the 7z file is more user-friendly in comparison to tar.* for some users. However, it does raise concerns about potential side-channel attacks targeting 7-Zip.

daniel:// stenberg:// 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

@Man2Dev the diff compared to tar.zx seem insignificant. Why does it raise concerns for attacks?

@Man2Dev :idle:

Man2Dev :idle: 1 settimana fa • mastodon (AP)

Presumably their user base likely prefers user-friendly options like zip. I was comparing the diff between zip and 7z. As for the attack although it migh, not really be practical I was referring to scenarios like the zlib vulnerability.

Questa voce è stata modificata (1 settimana fa)

Curl: curl release tarball file formats