# Why are all source codes .gz and not .tgz

13 posts / 0 new
Why are all source codes .gz and not .tgz
#1

Thank You

Mr. Ignorant.

Category:
Post Situation:
Tue, 2016-12-20 21:23
jasnyderjr

You mention gunzip but not tar.  They should be tarballs - .tar.gz or .tgz.  Decompress and untar them with tar -xvzf whatever.tgz .

If you mean that you did try tar, and not gunzip, and you still get garbage, let me know exactly which one you tried and I'll be happy to check if it's corrupted.

Snugdock should be in 3.7, or the most recent weekly.

Wed, 2016-12-21 13:30
smlewis

I.

Wed, 2016-12-21 15:36
jasnyderjr

I do not get tarballs--all I get is a file with .gz extension not .tgz.  For example I click on "Rosetta 3.7 source", and save to my downloads dir. and what I get is rosetta_src_3.7_bundle.gz.  I tried to email  general-support@rosettacommons.org but the mail came back undeliverable.  I'll try  license@uw.edu

Wed, 2016-12-21 15:36
jasnyderjr

They're just going to send you back here.

I assume the page we are talking about is https://www.rosettacommons.org/downloads/academic/3.7/, and the file we are talking about is rosetta_src_3.7_bundle.tar.gz?  Does it match this md5sum (taken from the md5 hashes list on the same page)?:

701b66d69132f1641d4cc35ed38a6786 rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle.tgz
Wed, 2016-12-21 16:51
smlewis

Well, when I click on "MD5.checksum ot files" I see "701b66d69132f1641d4cc35ed38a6786 rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle.tgz" in the list--If that is what is meant by "match", then yes, I think.

Actually, I just found a copy of rosetta_bin_linux_2016.32.58837_bundle.tar (Rosetta 3.2) laying around that I must have downloaded last August, and which appears to have SnugDock.  I suppose I can get started with that for now.

Wed, 2016-12-21 19:35
jasnyderjr

I meant for you to calculate the md5sum of whatever file you've downloaded.  Like so:

>\$ md5sum testfile

Wed, 2016-12-21 20:08
smlewis

Yes, md5sum rosetta_src_3.7_bundle.tar.gz gives

701b66d69132f1641d4cc35ed38a6786

Wed, 2016-12-21 23:49
jasnyderjr

Same file:

-> % gmd5sum rosetta_src_3.7_bundle.tgz
701b66d69132f1641d4cc35ed38a6786  rosetta_src_3.7_bundle.tgz

Untar with:

~> & tar -xvzf rosetta_src_3.7_bundle.tgz

Becomes:

-> % ll rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle
total 0
drwxr-xr-x@ 25 smlewis  staff   850 Aug 10 08:06 demos
drwxr-xr-x@ 36 smlewis  staff  1224 Aug 10 08:06 documentation
drwxr-xr-x@  9 smlewis  staff   306 Aug 10 08:06 main
drwxr-xr-x@ 43 smlewis  staff  1462 Aug 10 08:06 tools

This builds fine (at least it starts up fine), so the file is OK on my end.  What exactly do you get after untarring?

Thu, 2016-12-22 08:13
smlewis

Again, the file I get just has the .gz extension not .tgz.

However,If I do

>  tar -xvzf rosetta_src_3.7_bundle.gz

becomes

rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle/
rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle/demos/
rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle/demos/config-public.ru
rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle/demos/pilot/
rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle/demos/pilot/olli/
rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle/demos/pilot/olli/abinitio.cc

etc.

So, I do get a list of all the files and subdirectoires expected, but afterward, do not get the directory created named rosetta_src_3.7_bundle

Thu, 2016-12-22 11:34
jasnyderjr

I can't duplicate the extension changing problem.

That looks more or less like the files you should have; naviagate to main/source and compile it normally.  Is that subdirectory not present, or does it not compile....?  Can you not find the binaries after compiling?

Thu, 2016-12-22 11:42
smlewis

Oh I see.  The tar commnd was writing all the files/subdir's to "rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle"  while I was expecting and looking for a dir named "rosetta_src_3.7_bundle"  and "rosetta_src_2016.32.58837_bundle" directory already existed for months.  Also, I thought the 32 in the name stood for version 3.2 which was confusing me.  Anyhow,

I believe this is resolved.

Thanks

Thu, 2016-12-22 12:36
jasnyderjr

The 32 is from week 32 - Rosetta 3.7 is the week 32 release; we provide 'numbered' releases for the convienence of those who have to convince third parties (sysadmins, etc) to update Rosetta for them, and have an easier time doing so with numbered releases.  My apologies for the confusion!  I will suggest that we rename the files and re-tar them instead of just renaming the tarball next time.

Thu, 2016-12-22 13:11
smlewis