NationStates Jolt Archive

Is it possible to recombine a rar file without opening it?

I downloaded a file that was broken up into 114 rar files. I can't uncompress it, but it has worked for others. So I was hoping if it was able to recombine those 114 file it would work right.

You hit the nail right on the head. This question was very annoying.

Since, by definition, manipulating a file's contents requires opening it (because that's how the contents are accessed), your question makes absolutely no sense at all.

Jebus 114 files? Yikes, best way honestly would be to get someone else to take the contents of those 114 files and put it into one zip file.

Jebus 114 files? Yikes, best way honestly would be to get someone else to take the contents of those 114 files and put it into one zip file.

A 7ZIP file to be precise. I don't why people are even using RAR anymore...7ZIP is so much more efficient.

Uhh, why won't it unpack?

Is it possible to recombine a rar file without opening it?

I downloaded a file that was broken up into 114 rar files. I can't uncompress it, but it has worked for others. So I was hoping if it was able to recombine those 114 file it would work right.
can't get your porn to work, eh? :p

Reminds me of long ago when I made a huge backup of a lot of stuff by putting it in a multipart .zip file 3 on CDs. When I needed the backup it turned out no program can decompress multipart .zip, not even the one that compressed it.

I solved it by putting the files together with cat. That is I typed "cat file*.zip > newfile.zip" (file*.zip matched file1.zip file2.zip and so on) in the Linux command line. Then it appeared to be a broken archive and all files where found when I clicked the Fix-button.

That people still use .zip and .rar is almost as amazing as that people still use .mp3 and at low bit rates too.

A 7ZIP file to be precise. I don't why people are even using RAR anymore...7ZIP is so much more efficient.7Zip (as a program) or WinRAR should be able to open thearchives.

However, you should use something more efficient like bzip2 or 7zip.

Is it possible to recombine a rar file without opening it?

I downloaded a file that was broken up into 114 rar files. I can't uncompress it, but it has worked for others. So I was hoping if it was able to recombine those 114 file it would work right.
In that kind of set up, the first file is usually a self-extracting .exe, which recombines all of the other parts.

Reminds me of long ago when I made a huge backup of a lot of stuff by putting it in a multipart .zip file 3 on CDs. When I needed the backup it turned out no program can decompress multipart .zip, not even the one that compressed it.

I solved it by putting the files together with cat. That is I typed "cat file*.zip > newfile.zip" (file*.zip matched file1.zip file2.zip and so on) in the Linux command line. Then it appeared to be a broken archive and all files where found when I clicked the Fix-button.

That people still use .zip and .rar is almost as amazing as that people still use .mp3 and at low bit rates too.flac ftw!

114 RAR files - what sort of idiot would do that :confused:

What's wrong with one big super-compressed RAR file.

Uhh, why won't it unpack?

He is probably trying to use a zip program instead of a rar program. Filzip won't recognize broken up rar files, but winrar does fine. Which is primarily why I have it.

7Zip (as a program) or WinRAR should be able to open thearchives.

However, you should use something more efficient like bzip2 or 7zip.

And no one wants to use your damn marginal file types.

ZIP is OK for small files but I use RAR or ARJ. LZH is crap compression.

WinRAR is great, FilZip has issues with files over 2Gb.

114 RAR files - what sort of idiot would do that :confused:

What's wrong with one big super-compressed RAR file.

Or even a UHARC.

Or even a UHARC.

ARC! That's an old one. :D
I guess it's not quite dead.

snip

And no one wants to use your damn marginal file types.

Why not?

That people still use .zip and .rar is almost as amazing as that people still use .mp3 and at low bit rates too.

flac ftw!
Unless you’ve got an extremely nice sound system, 256 kbps+ mp3s are perfectly good. And for poor muggins here, flac files take up too much space.

BTW Posi, what did you think of Foobar in the end?

Reminds me of long ago when I made a huge backup of a lot of stuff by putting it in a multipart .zip file 3 on CDs. When I needed the backup it turned out no program can decompress multipart .zip, not even the one that compressed it.

I solved it by putting the files together with cat. That is I typed "cat file*.zip > newfile.zip" (file*.zip matched file1.zip file2.zip and so on) in the Linux command line. Then it appeared to be a broken archive and all files where found when I clicked the Fix-button.

That people still use .zip and .rar is almost as amazing as that people still use .mp3 and at low bit rates too.
What do you use? .ogg? It doesn't support album covers, and I like that functionality.

Unless you’ve got an extremely nice sound system, 256 kbps+ mp3s are perfectly good. And for poor muggins here, flac files take up too much space.

BTW Posi, what did you think of Foobar in the end?My car has the good sound system. Besides, with mp3, you don't really know if you are getting good quality or not until you play it and see what bit rate you got.

I ended up borking Foobar. Planels UI + bad code = black window of emptiness.

However, it wasn't too bad until I did that.

What do you use? .ogg? It doesn't support album covers, and I like that functionality.
mp3's don't support it either. It is you music player that does.

That people still use .zip and .rar is almost as amazing as that people still use .mp3 and at low bit rates too.

Hey, I still use .zip files, they work just fine on Windows. Perhaps that's the problem..

And I proclaim that I use .mp3 files, albeit I rip them with high bit rates, simply because they are so compatible and easy to manipulate.

My car has the good sound system. Besides, with mp3, you don’t really know if you are getting good quality or not until you play it and see what bit rate you got.
Not if you’re downloading off a reputable source. But anyways, one man’s poison...

I ended up borking Foobar. Planels UI + bad code = black window of emptiness.

However, it wasn’t too bad until I did that.
Yeah, a downside of the program is it isn’t very user friendly; hard when there’s so many 3rd party components. But if you’re willing to put in the time, it’ll pay off.

Not if you’re downloading off a reputable source. But anyways, one man’s poison...
I suppose, but I find it is just easier to find torrents that contain flac, than figure out who is a good source for mp3s.
Yeah, a downside of the program is it isn’t very user friendly; hard when there’s so many 3rd party components. But if you’re willing to put in the time, it’ll pay off.
Yeah, and people rarely posted their full config on the forums. You had to emulate from scratch, which is hard to do until you are skilled enough to not need to emulate...

What do you use? .ogg? It doesn't support album covers, and I like that functionality.

Audio purists, anarchists and other antiestablishmentarians are all about lossless formats, especially ogg because it is lossless and because it isn't mainstream. It being lossless is really irrelevant except for those of the population who have perfect hearing.

mp3's don't support it either. It is you music player that does.
Yes, they do. ID3v2.

Yes, they do. ID3v2.I see....

Audio purists, anarchists and other antiestablishmentarians are all about lossless formats, especially ogg because it is lossless and because it isn't mainstream. It being lossless is really irrelevant except for those of the population who have perfect hearing.ogg is only a container format. Ogg Vorbis, the most common use of ogg, is a lossy format. Ogg flac is lossless, but most just use flac by itself.

If you use Windows, upgrade your WinRAR. If you still can't extract, you likely have either damaged or missing files. If there's an SFV file in the same directory as the RARs, open it in an SFV checking program (I have no idea what Windows users use for this job these days). If a file is missing or damaged, this program will tell you which one. If you don't have an SFV file, WinRAR might tell you which file it has a problem with, or let you see on which file it's currently working on when it fails.

For anyone that doesn't understand why anyone would split something into a lot of RARs, there are two main reasons: the media the thing is meant to be stored on isn't large enough for the whole thing and thus has to be split, or, the more common reason, because it, for various boring reasons, makes (warez) scene distribution more efficient. They doing this is just something you have to live with.

And no one wants to use your damn marginal file types.

Why not? 7ZIP is ridiculously efficient compared to WinRAR...it can--as an example--take thirteen files of 4.7 megabytes each and compress them into one file of a size of 4.7 megabytes. Show me a version of RAR that can compress 61.1 megabytes into 4.7 megabytes.

Why not? 7ZIP is ridiculously efficient compared to WinRAR...it can--as an example--take thirteen files of 4.7 megabytes each and compress them into one file of a size of 4.7 megabytes. Show me a version of RAR that can compress 61.1 megabytes into 4.7 megabytes.13 files of what type? and where they all the same file?