h a l f b a k e r yAsk your doctor if the Halfbakery is right for you.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
could work on multimedia files as well, but only for
lossless information from the current compression. |
|
| |
[marked-for-deletion] Widely known to exist. Many
compression packages automatically select among
several different algorithms on a per-file basis in order
to provide the best possible compression. |
|
| |
The idea is to take a zip file and make it smaller. The
rezip will show you if its possible, and what the various
sizes and times will be. You can then decide accordingly. |
|
| |
This is widely known to NOT exist. |
|
| |
If your not sure if your file is with the best lossless
compression, you have no way to test it other than
extracting (sometimes a time consuming and usually
space consuming task) and then trying various zip options. |
|
| |
It could get very computationally expensive to do this in
the
manner you suggest. |
|
| |
By the way, the only algorithm supported by ZIP is
DEFLATE,
so while you could gain a little by using a better
implementation of DEFLATE (as 7zip does), you can't get
very far unless you deviate from the ZIP format. |
|
| |
If you're gonna do that, the simple way (which could be
accomplished with a little shell scripting) would be to TAR
the contents of the archive, optionally benchmark
performance of algorithms (e.g. PPMd, BZIP2, DEFLATE,
LZMA), and then compress the TAR archive....or more
realistically just use LZMA since it works well enough at an
acceptable speed. |
|
| |
Anyways this ground is well-trodden. Have a look at PAQ, I
think you'd like the work that went into it. |
|
| |