boneill@swan.ulowell.edu (Brian O'Neill) (08/09/88)
Well, since the discussion has come up again, I want to see what the general
consensus is on what standard to use. I'll take votes from now until Sep.
10. To vote, send mail to me at the below addresses. Put in the subject line
one of the following:
ARC
PK
ZOO
OTHER
For whichever you choose. For OTHER, specify what you wish afterwards.
Comments can be placed in the text.
Addresses: UUCP: {backbone}!mit-eddie!ulowell!boneill
InterNet: boneill@swan.ulowell.edu
Occasional summaries will be posted.
============================================================================
Brian O'Neill, MS-DOS Software Exchange
ArpaNet: boneill@swan.ulowell.edu
UUCP : {(backbones),harvard,mit-eddie,et. al.}!ulowell!boneill
boneill@swan.ulowell.edu (Brian O'Neill) (08/10/88)
I forgot to mention that this is only a preliminary vote, to find out what
the general consensus is at this point in time.
Also, if you use Rnmail, please be sure to edit the Subject line to include
your choice (ARC,PK,ZOO,OTHER), and no other words containing the above
letters.
I posted the original message this morning, and in < 12 hours have gotten
>30 replies...
============================================================================
Brian O'Neill, MS-DOS Software Exchange
ArpaNet: boneill@swan.ulowell.edu
UUCP : {(backbones),harvard,mit-eddie,et. al.}!ulowell!boneillleonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) (08/12/88)
In article <8503@swan.ulowell.edu> boneill@swan.ulowell.edu (Brian O'Neill) writes:
<Well, since the discussion has come up again, I want to see what the general
<consensus is on what standard to use. I'll take votes from now until Sep.
<10. To vote, send mail to me at the below addresses. Put in the subject line
<one of the following:
<
< ARC
< PK
< ZOO
< OTHER
<
<For whichever you choose. For OTHER, specify what you wish afterwards.
<Comments can be placed in the text.
Well, first I need some questions answered about ZOO. I understand that it
preserves paths as well as file names. This is good. I would assume that it
preserves file sizes as well or it would be useless for data files. But I
seem to recall hearing something about it not preserving either date/time
staps or file attributes. Does it preserve these? If so, I guess I'd switch.
Z
--
Leonard Erickson ...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]
"I used to be a hacker. Now I'm a 'microcomputer specialist'.
You know... I'd rather be a hacker."pechter@dasys1.UUCP (Bill Pechter) (08/13/88)
My question is -- Has anyone got Zoo for CP/M. I can handle .lbr, .arc
under the old CP/M systems I have but I haven't seen Zoo on that O/S.
--
Bill Pechter {sun!hoptoad,cmcl2!phri}!dasys1!pechter
USnail 103 Governors Road, Lakewood, NJ 08701
AT&T 201-370-0709 Eveningsboneill@swan.ulowell.edu (Brian O'Neill) (08/21/88)
Here are the standings as of Aug. 20...
ZOO 106
PK 44
ARC 24
Shar-Compress 2
Tar-Compress 1
"earthpig" 1 *
* "earthpig" is Tracy Tims archiver. Someone voted for it, and he
sent me the info. It sounds good. It's not a compression archiver,
but rather a text archiver. Binary files are encoded with roughly
1:1.1 sizewise, and creates a file which normal LZW compression can
do well on. Unfortunately, it isn't complete.
============================================================================
Brian O'Neill, MS-DOS Software Exchange
ArpaNet: boneill@swan.ulowell.edu
UUCP : {(backbones),harvard,mit-eddie,et. al.}!ulowell!boneill