shypike wrote:So, you're asking us to compensate for a bad design of Winrar?
It's rather lame that rar would need fillers.
Are peope actual posting self-repairing rar files instead of par2 files?
I've never seen such a post.
nobody's perfect. the whole concept of putting binaries into something that was intended initially for text is far from being ideal as you may imagine too. rar recovery record scenerio works with corrupted bytes instead of skipped ones - so why not help him just a little bit to do its job if there is such a possibility. sometimes people post bad par2, bad archives, recovery record generally operates with smaller blocks than par2 does, files can come from ddl where rr is quite common and just dumped to newz..
another variant - the big set of archives with rr in every volume and par2 for the whole set. a good part of archive got lost so it's beyond repair with par2. on other parts - just a few blocks are missing. rr can deal perfectly with this situation.
so there are scenarios where par2 can't help while rr can. people use rr - jbinup, warezfaq guides recommend to use it (while, au contraire, quickpar guide discourage it).par2 should be present in normal situation - i agree on that, but if for whatever reason it fails - there is a relatively easy variant to have a second line of defense.
ps didn't experimented with it yet, but probably, even if there's no rr, rar will restore more files from a "full" broken archive than from a "short" variant.