Message:22762 In: PACKET.WW
From: I0OJJDate: Tue, 19 May 26 17:43:00 Z
Newsgroups: PACKET.WW
Subject: Re: XZ Compression
Message-ID: <1BZ_IR0EQ>
Path: GB7RJJ|K7EK|DK0WUE|N2NOV|KC2NJV|LU9DCE|EA2RCF|IR0EQ
R:260519/1749Z 13616@GB7RJJ.#79.GBR.EURO LinBPQ6.0.25
R:260519/1748z @:K7EK.#NOKY.KY.USA.NOAM $:1BZ_IR0EQ
R:260519/1747Z 29618@DK0WUE.#BAY.DEU.EU LinBPQ6.0.25
R:260519/1746z @:N2NOV.#RICH.NY.USA.NOAM $:1BZ_IR0EQ
R:260519/1746Z 5439@KC2NJV.#NASS.NY.USA.NOAM LinBPQ6.0.25
R:260519/1746Z 13925@LU9DCE.TOR.BA.ARG.SOAM LinBPQ6.0.25
R:260519/1743Z @:EA2RCF.EAVI.ESP.EU #:14162 [Vitoria] $:1BZ_IR0EQ
R:260519/1743z @:IR0EQ.ITA.EU [Rome] $:1BZ_IR0EQ
>From i0ojj@rgate.ampr.org Tue May 19 19:43:23 2026
Received: from rgate.ampr.org by rgate.ampr.org (JNOS2.0q.1) with SMTP
id AA1727 ; Tue, 19 May 2026 19:43:23 +0200
Received: by rgate.ampr.org with SMTP
id AA1724 ; Tue, 19 May 2026 19:42:51 +0200
Message-Id: <1725@rgate.ampr.org>
>From: i0ojj@rgate.ampr.org
That's OK all.
Try also the .bz2, txz and perhaps the .lz.
Every kinda compressor own switches for further
compression, too.
--
73 and ciao, gustavo i0ojj
non multa, sed multum
-----------
Date: 19 May 26 13:07:00 GMT
From: kq6up@kq6up.#sca.ca.usa.noam
To: packet@ww
Subject: XZ Compression
Path: I0OJJ!N2NOV!KQ6UP
>From kq6up%kq6up.#sca.ca.usa.noam@i0ojj.ampr.org Tue May 19 15:09:00 2026
Received: from i0ojj.ampr.org by i0ojj.ampr.org (JNOS2.0q.1) with SMTP
id AA17060002 ; Tue, 19 May 2026 15:09:00 +0200
Message-Id: <7376_KQ6UP@n2nov.bbs>
>From: kq6up@kq6up.#sca.ca.usa.noam
X-JNOS-User-Port: Circuit (ARECS:N2NOV-7 N2NOV-7) -> Sending message
I find that if I use XZ to compress my attachments prior to
sending them as a 7plus file, I get the smallest possible file.
As far I know, XZ has the highest compression ratio at the
expense of a lot of processing time to compress.
To "unzip" use the command unxz in Linux/UNIX.
-73 de Chris KQ6UP
-----------
Return To Bulletin List