Alex Malinovich wrote: > The same way that RAR does. They tell you whether that discreet part of > the archive is corrupted or not. If it is corrupted it's just as useless > whether it's a RAR archive or any other type of archive.
Bzt, try again. I asked "against what". You create the archives and they're sitting there on the disc. You use whatever tool you want and it spits out a value. Against what do you check that value? There is no reference to check against. RAR, on the other hand, computes the value for the files inside the archive and stores that value *in the archive itself*. Later when you ask it to check the validity of the archive it can reference the stored value. > Sorry, but I'm just not seeing it. If RAR had some recovery features > along the lines of PAR, I might be more impressed. Be impressed. Why do you think one of the reasons unrar-free can't deal with >= 3.00 rar files? From RAR's 3.0 notes: 9. Added support of so called recovery volumes (.rev files), which can be used to reconstruct missing files in a volume set. One .rev file allows to reconstruct one missing RAR volume, for example, 5 .rev files are able to reconstruct any 5 volumes. > But seeing as how PAR > works with any type of a multi-part archive I'm just not seeing any > particular strength to using RAR. Combine the above. Again, reference against what? That information needs to be created and stored at the time of creation. Having an md5sum 3 months later with nothing to check it against is useless. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. -------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature