From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-07 12:34:23
"Gennadiy Rozental" <gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden]> writes:
> "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> "Gennadiy Rozental" <gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> >> How do I decode a .rar file?
>> > www.rarlab.com
>> What is your rationale for using an archive format that is not in
>> common use, and for which there is no free decoder?
> No rationale. This is the archiver I am using for last ... I do know .. how
> many years. It's default on all my NT boxes. BTW I believe it *is* in common
> I should've use zip though, sorry.
>> .zip, .tar.gz,
>> and .tar.bz2 aren't good enough for you?
> I like rar way better from both compression (couldn't say about bz2, but
> then it require 2 step archiving) and convinience standpoints. And I an used
> to it.
>> Yes, I realize that I can download and install a trial decoder, but it
>> seems slightly perverse that I should have to do that just so I can
>> analyze your patch.
> If I not mistaking you could use it without limitations. In worse case it
> will give you notice.
AFAICT it stops working after the trial period is over.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk