LZH Files and SparkFS on RISC OS Pi

I have lots of LZH files, everything I’ve read about SparkFS says it can open them but it doesn’t work for me. I’m setting the type to DDC. Is this the correct thing do do? Do I need the paid version of SparkFS? I notice it doesn’t have LZH listed under modules, is this something I need to install:

I’m setting the type to DDC.

Just dragging a recognised file type to the iconbar icon will set the filetype appropriately.

Take a zip and file type is as FFF then drag it to SparkFS and you will see what I mean.

Paid for version I’m afraid.
Each decompression (or compression on the read/write) is a module in the application, looks like there are some modules left out of the read only version. The read/write version will set you back a massive £5.99

I’ve had the full version so long I don’t recall when I bought it. There are combinations that will do the same, but it’s too much faff just to save a few pennies.

I’m afraid paying for closed source basic utilities is a bit too retro for me, I only got into this to experience the fun parts of old systems! I will extract them on my PC… or on my phone, my A1200, my x68000, my mac performa, my toaster……

It’s generally not a good idea to open archives on non-RISC OS systems because it’ll destroy the file information. You could try Nick Robert’s port of lharc from here: http://tigger.orpheusweb.co.uk/programs/misc.html

The command line utility seems to work, haven’t tried opening archives however

My LZH files don’t contain files that were created in RISC OS anyway so turning them into Zip files in another OS and then bringing them back is no problem, the whole point of this is to work with PlayKISS which uses SparkFS to read files directly from archives. It was throwing errors when I tried to use LZH files, for now obvious reasons. When I put the files into a Zip in another OS and bring it back it works fine. Hopefully a good open source replacement for this SparkFS emerges, lots of stuff seems to depend on it (ADFFS being another I use a lot)!

Not sure whether this is open source or not, but it’s free*: http://www.starfighter.acornarcade.com/mysite/utilities.htm#infozip – someone on here (Steve Pampling to be precise) pointed me at this just a couple of days ago, works fine.

• I believe so, anyway. If it’s shareware, I’ve not seen any note telling us so!

Never having played with dolls *.lhz files are a bit of a mystery to me but this sounds promising:

Unfortunately, although SparkFS will read .LZH files, it won’t write them. To fill this gap, I’ve produced an up-to-date port of the DOS/Unix “lharc” utility. This is not the first port of this program by any means, but all the earlier ports had problems.
Of course, if you haven’t got SparkFS, you can use lharc to decompress KiSS dolls into an X-File.

Then again using a PC to create archives supported by SparkFS might be easier/quicker
Jeffrey should know a thing or two about infozip btw.

Well, I couldn’t resist ;)
Copy lharc to !Boot.Library, install and open DtLharc. Download a doll of your choice and drop the archive on DtLharc’s icon. Select all files from the archive and extract them to an empty folder. Drop folder on PlayKISS and enjoy!
Simple enough doing it without SparkFS or RaFS (which isn’t 32-bit clean).

Simple enough doing it without SparkFS or RaFS (which isn’t 32-bit clean).

The (BASIC) source is available on the site should anyone wish to play

Hopefully a good open source replacement for this SparkFS emerges, lots of stuff seems to depend on it.

SparkFS isn’t just a “basic utility”, however: it’s a bit more clever than that. It’s an image filing system for archives, which allows them to be read from and written to on the fly as though they were normal directories. ImageFSs are a bizarre part of RISC OS, with advantages and disadvantages¹ — with the full SparkFS loaded, LZH archives would look just like a normal directory to anything navigating around the disc (which is probably why PlayKISS uses it).

If you want open-source tools which don’t offer this ImageFS functionality (allowing you to extract files to disc, or put files from disc into an archive), there are plenty around. You’ve already been pointed to an LZH port; you’ll find others under “Utilities” at http://www.riscos.info/packages/SectionIndex.html

¹ This ability to navigate into archive files can cause unintended resource problems when using search tools to find things on a disc.

PS: @Clive, this is how to do footnotes… :-)

this is how to do footnotes…

“This” being the use of a number (for the footnote) enclosed with [ and ] (hope that works) followed by a space in the text and then the same combination at the foot where the note is.
What would be nice is if the footnote rendition automatically made the text smaller, but hey ho.

and then the same combination at the foot where the note is.

I use this…

Blah blah.
Here is a reference to a footnote[1] and then another[2].
Blah blah.
Blah.
Blah blah blah.

fn1. <small>First footnote.</small>

fn2. <small>Second footnote.</small>

“This” being the use of a number (for the footnote) enclosed with [ and ] (hope that works) followed by a space in the text and then the same combination at the foot where the note is.

No, like this…

...with advantages and disadvantages[1] -- which...

fn1.This ability to navigate...

(apologies for the derail).

.fn1 <small>First footnote.</small>

.fn2 <small>Second footnote.</small>

I’m no Textile expert(!), but shouldn’t that be

fn1.<small>First footnote.</small>

fn2.<small>Second footnote.</small>

?

I’m no Textile expert

Me neither, but there are couple of things to think about:

1. I did say “What would be nice is if the footnote rendition automatically made the text smaller”

2. the fn version seems like another keypress required and is rather a diversion from the original item I mentioned anyway: see point 1

Interesting, all. Thanks! Derail? Oh, yes, so it is…

@ Steve: Yes, you’re right. Too much coding, putting the dot first. Example corrected.

@ Other Steve: There would be lots of things it would be nice if Textile did…if not correctly, then at least consistently. ;-) With a lack of preview function, anything complicated (some links, much code) is an exercise in posting and edit-to-fix before anybody notices.