7-Zip Developer Releases the First Official Linux Version (bleepingcomputer.com) 87
An official version of the popular 7-zip archiving program has been released for Linux for the first time. Bleeping Computer reports: Linux already had support for the 7-zip archive file format through a POSIX port called p7zip but it was maintained by a different developer. As the p7zip developer has not maintained their project for 4-5 years, 7-Zip developer Igor Pavlov decided to create a new official Linux version based on the latest 7-Zip source code. Pavlov has released 7-Zip for Linux in AMD64, ARM64, x86, and armhf versions, which users can download [via their respective links].
"These new 7-Zip binaries for Linux were linked (compiled) by GCC without -static switch. And compiled 32-bit executables (x86 and armhf) didn't work on some arm64 and amd64 systems, probably because of missing of some required .so files." "Please write here, if you have some advices how to compile and link binaries that will work in most Linux systems," Pavlov stated on his release page.
"These new 7-Zip binaries for Linux were linked (compiled) by GCC without -static switch. And compiled 32-bit executables (x86 and armhf) didn't work on some arm64 and amd64 systems, probably because of missing of some required .so files." "Please write here, if you have some advices how to compile and link binaries that will work in most Linux systems," Pavlov stated on his release page.
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
"you don't do much with linux if you don't use these two obscure chips"
Everything i've installed linux on in the last 10 years has worked out of the box with driver support. I use linux all day every day and I'm posting from linux right now.
Re: (Score:2)
lol "you don't do much with linux if you don't use these two obscure chips" Everything i've installed linux on in the last 10 years has worked out of the box with driver support. I use linux all day every day and I'm posting from linux right now.
Ditto, except Blutooth 5.0. Still waiting for that to work
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Linux and Cabbage (Score:2)
"Maybe your Linux distro just sucks?"
My whole life, I've despised only two foods. One of them is cabbage. And it seems like every time somebody learns that, they say, "But you haven't had it THIS way!" No. I've had enough cabbage in enough forms to conclude that it sucks. I don't have to dig around for the mystical dish that elevates it.
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:3)
Never had a problem with arduinos, even Chinese knockoffs.
Used them pretty extensively in my EE program.
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:2)
So, a single USB to Serial, Printer (?), Uart chip - a cheap Chinese knockoff of a more standard chip (which works just fine) - is your sole basis for the complaint.
Can't argue with you.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Now if only they could fix the dependency hell of package management. Unlike the driver situation, which is the fault of the manufacturers, the Linux community is entirely in control of their own packaging.
No, I won't listen to any tripe about how it "works fine for me." I've been trying to switch to Linux for about 15 years, and I'm sick to death of needing to use a command prompt all the damn time while all the fanboys insist that's never necessary.
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:2)
The command line is the primary interface to run tasks on your operating system, why would you want to avoid it?
I don't even understand how you can use an operating system without it. The first thing I always do with windows is install bash-related improvements (msysgit, clink) and a proper terminal. Unusable otherwise.
I guess that maybe for some users, the web browser is their operating system, and they don't need this? But then the supporting OS behind the browser becomes irrelevant.
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What on earth does 7zip need other than libc?
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not libc. The C++ runtime? Sure. Libssl, libz, or other libraries that didn't always care about ABI compatibility. Yep. They make universal binaries a pain. But libc only becomes an issue if you try to swap in certain versions that target embedded platforms.
You said Libc is the problem for portability. What are you seeing? The last glibc hiccup I recall was the 2.1 ABI break. (Fixed in 2.2 meaning another break but 2.0 code worked with 2.2.)
Now having to build using an old distro does suck. With
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, it isn't for fucks sake
It's shit like node.js that is causing interoperability hell.
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
More like it needs some obscure library that doesn’t have a package. That library needs two more libraries except one is the dev version again without a package. So in the end they distribute a container file that is 300 megabytes. The modern Linux experience.
Re: (Score:2)
> So in the end they distribute a container file that is 300 megabytes. The modern Linux experience.
They're just trying to make your life interesting! When your system patches libraries for exploits, the containers' versions of those libraries won't get patched, leaving you vulnerable to long-fixed errors.
Why should they learn to package and not give you some practice with intrusion response?
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. Devs who rely on containers to fix dependency hell are incompetent.
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:3)
Mod Parent UP.
The whole Container thing is the lazy mans way of not bothering to design and write qualify software. Instead of thinking about dependencies during the design phase, or solving the dependency issues during development, an entire new landscape was developed to ignore the problem entirety.
Unfortunately it's based upon a misunderstanding of the actual problem and still doesn't completely solve it as a result.
Containers mostly result in more complicated deployment, as can be seen by the explosion
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:1)
Containers solve 15 different problems at once. Managing dependencies is just 1 of the 15 things. If all we needed was to manage dependencies we'd just ship tarballs of chroots with an executable wrapper and be done with it.
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:2)
That's pretty much what a container is
Re: (Score:2)
distribute a container file that is 300 megabytes
MacOS would like a word.
Re: And in true Linux fashion... (Score:1)
PROTIP: Since about a decade, Linux is more likely to run and have drivers than Windows.
Especially for older or obscure hardware.
It's literally why I installed Linux for some people.
But keep spreading that Microsoft PR talking point... while also being the one pressuring hardware manufacturers to not release Linux drivers, behind closed doors.
No source code (Score:5, Insightful)
Binaries only, no source code available.
For myself, I'll stick to p7zip until that changes.
Re:No source code (Score:5, Informative)
Binaries only, no source code available.
For myself, I'll stick to p7zip until that changes.
He left a comment [sourceforge.net] on his project page about it. Seems like he intends to:
The license for source code will be same - GNU LGPL.
p7zip has big compiling scripts that are good for linux distributions. But 7-Zip for Linux doesn't use these compiler scripts now. It's possible to merge 7-Zip code with p7zip compiler scripts.
But I don't work with Linux. So it's difficult for me to maintain all these Linux scripting and packaging things from p7zip.
And developer of p7zip port didn't show any activity last 4-5 years.
Re: (Score:1)
Maintaining the build could be a community thing. I just want the tgz so it can be merged into pkgsrc for NetBSD.
If it's held close it might as well not be GPLd.
Re: (Score:2)
"Will be the same"? Where is the code available?
Re: (Score:3)
There is a fork of p7zip which is already picked up by many Linux distro's.
https://github.com/jinfeihan57... [github.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You’re going to audit it?
Re: (Score:2)
No, but someone would. It has enough name recognition to be interesting.
Re: No source code (Score:1)
You a big fan of buying cats in bags?
Re: (Score:2)
If the compression savings over regular zip makes not using zip worth it, then there are significantly better compressors then 7zip also. No better than RAR really.
Re: It's a trap (Score:2)
Well, I guess in a small way, thatâ(TM)s better than having it drop unencrypted child porn on your computer and then alerting the police to it.
Re:It's a trap (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's a trap (Score:5, Funny)
They're running windows. Trusting binaries is a given.
Re: (Score:2)
7-Zip has published their source code all along.
Re: It's a trap (Score:2)
If so, what's the story here then? Why wasn't it available on Linux before?
Iâ(TM)m also curious: what does 7-zip offer to the Linux command line that tar + xz doesn't? Aren't they both using LMZA/LMZA2?
Re: It's a trap (Score:5, Informative)
Because the developer doesn't have the market for it and the community never picked it up because they just relied on the goodwill of the p7zip developer. Who has since abandoned the project.
So now the 7zip developer tries to do a good deed here completely of their own accord, and all anyone on slashdot does is rake them over the coals. Why should they continue?
Sometimes the open source community act extremely entitled and really suck balls - and this comment trail is a prime example.
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps the Open Source community doesn't WANT a binary blob and so are not thankful.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a new maintainer of a fork of p7zip here:
https://github.com/jinfeihan57... [github.com]
Re: It's a trap (Score:2)
If the source code is there but abandoned, doesn't it suggest that there isn't much demand for 7zip on Linux?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I occasionally come across .7z files from that era. When I do, I re-encode them as .ZIP using a 7Z-portable under Wine. It doesn't happen often.
Where is that XKCD? Ah, here [xkcd.com].
Re: (Score:2)
And haven't we moved on to zstd at this point? As much as it pains me to say something positive about FB, imo it really is fast+good enough to serve as the next general-use compressor (with dictionary tweaking as an option). Been using it more and more especially with tar, autodetect zst on linux or use the switch on my mac.
Re: It's a trap (Score:1)
zstd is not really that great. xz was the best in terms of pure compression ratio. zstd was faster but also comparably worse, so that using other settings on other compressors were able to give you equivalent performances.
I did a complete test of many compressors, and In terms of compression/speed ratio, bz2 actually gives you the best deal. Anything beyond that results in awful slow-downs that just aren't worth the negligible gains.
Also, leave the compression ratio parameters away. They all have their defa
Re: It's a trap (Score:2)
I disagree. zstd is very good because it offers a much better compromise.
The CPU cost of decompressing LZMA is prohibitive and the gains in size are minimal.
Re: (Score:3)
Considering that the source is not being released, I would not use this program for fear that it adds encrypted child porn to my archives.
All your archives already contain CP encrypted with a one-time pad.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that the source is not being released, I would not use this program for fear that it adds encrypted child porn to my archives.
All your archives already contain CP encrypted with a one-time pad.
True, but I think I could convince a jury that I can produce any given result from an arbitrary input if I can provide the one-time pad. I don't think I could convince the jury if the key is AES-256.
Wow (Score:2)
A developer openly asking for advice very publicly. I am impressed.
I love 7-zip (Score:5, Informative)
I'm sure Linux alternatives already have great CLI. They always do.
Re: I love 7-zip (Score:1)
Yes, they do. Usually the only "problem" is them offering so many possibilities that newbies may feel overwhelmed.
(Thouh the default philosophy for Unix-like tools is to not require any parameters unless you want something special, pipe stuff through them, and give no output unless there is a problem. So trying to just use pipes ore redirections, and give it a list of files as parameters if that is appropriate, usually works, or tells you what else you need and what to look for in the (man) page. If not, th
Is "without-static" the problem here? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Once he releases the source code, those of us who enjoy packaging Linux programs may make what he's missing. There's some great free services out there such as the OpenSUSE Build Service (build.opensuse.org) that allow you to create binary/source packages for multiple Linux distributions and architectures.
Another is COPR, at https://copr.fedorainfracloud.... [fedorainfracloud.org] . It is Fedora-oriented, but also includes OpenSUSE builders.
Re: (Score:1)
I think he should also ship "snap" and "flatpak" packages that will end the dependency problem forever. I agree a static binary would be a better choice too.
Re: (Score:2)
Snap is garbage. Avoid.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a fucking compression algorithm. Why on earth should it need anything but libc?
I can't think of a worse suggestion than snap.
Re: (Score:1)
It's a fucking compression algorithm. Why on earth should it need anything but libc?
It doesn't need anything exotic. Beyond standard libraries, threads and math seem pretty reasonable.
Re: Is "without-static" the problem here? (Score:1)
There are still distributions out there who haven't solved installing and using multipe versions of libraries in parallel?
Come on, if their documentation on their package manager is good, I can give any distribution that feature in a week, or even a weekend if a quick hack is OK!
That snap/flatpack crowd is a bunch of clueless Windows mindset kids. They merely see Linux like a cargo cult sees planes.
Re: (Score:2)
> That snap/flatpack crowd is a bunch of clueless Windows mindset kids. They merely see Linux like a cargo cult sees planes.
Exactly. Not only can they not be bothered to install to /usr/local or /opt, you can't even change the hardwired /snap path.
They're all fucking retards.
Re: Is "without-static" the problem here? (Score:1)
Under Linux, you have a package manager. The package file contains the dependencies. Any package manager worth its disk space will automaticall resolve an conflicts and install multiple versions of the libraries at standard locations if necessary. While the package's code will link to the right version.
But you can always tell the dynamic linker to have it load libraries for a executable from different places, with environment variables. E.g. ( LD_PRELOAD=somepath/libfoo.9.0.1 myprogram )
So really no
tooooooo late (Score:2)
We have workalikes already.
One might have cared a decade ago. Or two.
Might.
Re: tooooooo late (Score:2)
Someone that wants a common tool with common arguments might be interested, but that bridge has, likely been crossed.
Maybe for new workflows.
Re: tooooooo late (Score:1)
All the compression tools on Linux have such common arguments that you can literally swap one out for another and the GUI would never notice.
You can always tell some tool did not originate on Linux/Unix, when it's got an incompatible argument structure.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean with regards to common arguments between Linux and Windows.
Re: tooooooo late (Score:1)
We have literally dozens of much better tools.
idiot (Score:1)
Anyone who can't build for linux/win/macos from the same source is a moron.
Re: idiot (Score:1)
Seconded. I mean most languages already include generic APIs that support both POSIX and Windows APIs.
I guess he went all-in on the Windows APIs. Which alos explains why he thinks the Linux world would need a stupid monolithic desktop app like 7zip.
Re: idiot (Score:2)
Also agree with the sentiment, although"moron" is a bit harsh. More like he's just a lazy fuck who relies upon some IDE to manage his make instead of taking the 2 or 3 hours to learn how to use one of several meta-make systems like CMake, Meson, etc.
Oh well.
7zip is pretty much unnecessary anyway, unless you are stuck in some large Corp with a locked down IT infrastructure run by a real moron.
Re: idiot (Score:2)
none of the C build systems you linked are any good though
About Time (Score:2)
It is about time that POSIX-7zip catches up. Recently I had to use the windows command line version 7zip.exe through Wine to work with some archives because there were no POSIX version 19 available...
Re: About Time (Score:1)
Uum, because everyone uses xz?
What for though? (Score:1)
xz and tar work just fine.
Desktop kiddies not understanding Unix again?
What about 7z and 7za? Weren't they separate? (Score:2)
What about 7z and 7za? Weren't they separate from p7zip?
Re: (Score:2)
Nevermind, they were part of the same software suite.