Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

file cutter for tiger

M-theory said:
I posted something before with no replies, so I thought I would try again...

Does anyone know of a program that will cut a large file into pieces and have the ability to remake the file at a later date. There is a windows equivalent called 'cutter xp' http://downloads.zipgenius.it/zipgenius/index.htm
Click to expand...

Stuff It will split files. RAR for OS X will split files into fixed size output files during compression.

As another poster suggested, there is split&concat which is simply a front end to the underlying command line tools.
 
mkrishnan said:
You could probably also use the split and cat command line commands upon which this utility is clearly based. ;)
Click to expand...

So these are basic unix apps already available? I wasn't aware of that. Good to know. :)
 
radiantm3 said:
So these are basic unix apps already available? I wasn't aware of that. Good to know. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, the only iffy thing is that MacOS has these things called resource forks in some files (I think, mostly executables and dynamic libraries). In these cases, the Unix filesystem commands may not always be able to correctly handle operations on the files. Not 100% sure about this -- it may have been resolved at some point after the launch of OS X. But occasionally this is an issue.

But it might also be an issue for the GUI program that was listed if it's a front-end for split and cat.... :(

It should *not* be an issue for any document file -- any kind of office documents, music or video files, etc, because otherwise these files wouldn't work on PCs when created on Macs. I think it's purely an issue of executables and maybe libraries.
 
mkrishnan said:
Yeah, the only iffy thing is that MacOS has these things called resource forks in some files (I think, mostly executables and dynamic libraries). In these cases, the Unix filesystem commands may not always be able to correctly handle operations on the files. Not 100% sure about this -- it may have been resolved at some point after the launch of OS X. But occasionally this is an issue.
Click to expand...

It is still an issue to some extent. Command line executables are generally fine, but OS X applications are generally actually stored as a directory structure with various bits and pieces.

Generally, when you want to transport files around and need to split them into smaller chunks you are better off first creating a zip archive of the files (using the finder context menu) and then cuting up the resulting zip file. In many cases zipping the files first will mean that you end up having to juggle fewer file chunks since the archive is compressed.
 
mrichmon said:
It is still an issue to some extent. Command line executables are generally fine, but OS X applications are generally actually stored as a directory structure with various bits and pieces.

Generally, when you want to transport files around and need to split them into smaller chunks you are better off first creating a zip archive of the files (using the finder context menu) and then cuting up the resulting zip file....
Click to expand...

Or just use "tar" piped to "split"

tar -czf - foobar | split -b 1024m - foobr

Above will make a compressed archive of "foobar" and split the archive into segments of 1GB in lenght. foobar may be a directory, file or list of these.
 
:) wow, great, thanks a lot guys/girls...not to start a big discussion about this BUT, this is one of the reasons, among millions ;) , for switching to mac. The fact that there is a whole unix world underneath the GUI is absolutely wonderful. Probably a bold statement but I would guess that most mac users don't take advantage of this fact.
 
M-theory said:
:) wow, great, thanks a lot guys/girls...not to start a big discussion about this BUT, this is one of the reasons, among millions ;) , for switching to mac. The fact that there is a whole unix world underneath the GUI is absolutely wonderful. Probably a bold statement but I would guess that most mac users don't take advantage of this fact.
Click to expand...

The switch to the Unix core was one of the big reasons I started becoming interested in Macs, although, to be honest, the cute factor was the other. :eek: ;) :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back