dick@plx.UUCP (Dick Flanagan) (10/26/87)
Expires: Sender: Followup-To: In article <4290@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> tim@cit-vax.UUCP (Timothy L. Kay) writes: >Wouldn't it be nice if arc and pkarc knew about subdirectories, so that >you could back up several subdirectories into the same archive without >name conflicts? [...] The ability to handle subdirectories is one of the many advantages to the zoo archiver. Zoo was posted not too long ago. If you can't locate a copy, let me know. -- Dick Flanagan, W6OLD I'll take a drug test when UUCP: ...!ucbvax!sun!plx!dick Reagan takes an IQ test. GEnie: FLANELE,
luis@grinch.UUCP (luis) (10/28/87)
>[...] > >The ability to handle subdirectories is one of the many advantages to the >zoo archiver. Zoo was posted not too long ago. If you can't locate a copy, >let me know. >-- >Dick Flanagan, W6OLD I'll take a drug test when >UUCP: ...!ucbvax!sun!plx!dick Reagan takes an IQ test. >GEnie: FLANAGAN Hello Dick, Is Zoo ARC/PKARC compatible? What are it's advantages? and for that matter, dis-advantages? Any information would be greatly appriciated... Thank you... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Luis Chanu "Live every day as if it were your last, UUCP: ...ihnp4!sun!aeras!grinch!luis because one day you will be right." UUCP: ...pyramid!wjvax!grinch!luis -Benny Hill Disk-Claimer: That's not your disk, that's my disk. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
davidsen@steinmetz.UUCP (10/30/87)
In article <258@grinch.grinch.UUCP> luis@grinch.UUCP (Luis Chanu) writes: >Hello Dick, > Is Zoo ARC/PKARC compatible? What are it's advantages? and for that >matter, dis-advantages? Any information would be greatly appriciated... >Thank you... zoo is not an ARC enhancer, it's a completely separate system. It has a number of methods of handling directories: save: default is save subdirectory info option is delete directory info and save with filename only extract: default is to current directory option is to the original directory if present option is to create and use original directory name Why I like zoo: a) it runs portably in most systems, Xenix, MPort, Ultrix, SunOS3, unix-pc, MS-DOS, and VMS. b) Compression is good. I ran some tests with PKARC, ZOO, and DWC, concluded that there was not more than 5% between them, and that the file content determined which way the 5% went. c) speed is *very* good. I tested against PKARC and DWC and concluded that they are (again) within 5%. On UNIX it takes about 40% more CPU than piping cpio into compress (non-portable for sure). d) ZOO handles pathnames. You can save an entire directory tree and restore it. Pathnames may optionally stripped either on storage on on extract. e) ZOO handles UNIX filenames, and does something reasonable when moved into DOS. f) ZOO preserves date and time modified. g) ZOO will accept a files list from stdin. h) ZOO will give me a short form columnar files listing that doesn't scroll off my screen. i) ZOO will delete files after I archive them, but not as they are are added. This means the originals are untouched until the archive file is closed. j) ZOO will optionally add only newer versions of files in the archive. I can update using *.* and avoid typing the names of all files to be updated. k) ZOO will optionally add only files which are not in the archive. This protects against overwriting existing files. l) ZOO saves older versions of files and deleted files until you choose to pack the archive. These older versions can be recovered. m) ZOO has both expert and novice modes. The novice mode is very like arc in structure, and reduces learning time for current arc users. n) ZOO allows me to put multiline comments on each file. This is often enough to eliminate the need for a readme file, and is useful when a program creates many data file with similar names. o) ZOO has been "rock solid reliable" for me. I like using software that doesn't give me learning opportunities. Sorry if I sound like a commercial, but I really like this program, particularly the last point. I have a wish list of new features, but as far as I see everything there works. Not shareware, real working public domain software. -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
paul@cgh.UUCP (11/01/87)
In article <258@grinch.grinch.UUCP> luis@grinch.UUCP (Luis Chanu) writes: > Is Zoo ARC/PKARC compatible? What are it's advantages? and for that >matter, dis-advantages? Any information would be greatly appriciated... The advantage part is easy, I'll have to think a bit about the disadvantages. Zoo is free, with souce code provided. It will compile on VMS, Unix -- both Sys V and BSD, MS-DOS and Amiga. Zoo files created on any of these systems can be moved to any of the other systems on the list. As mentioned, zoo will store a complete pathname, and it can be made to extract files either by their filename only, or you can use the entire pathname to create a directory tree. It is not pkarc/arc compatible, but this is an advantage as no one ever wondered why his copy of ZOO would not extract files from SQUASHED.ZOO. You can add comments to the internal zoo directory, file by file. If you can find a 'find' program, you can pipe the file list to be stored to zoo via standard input. The standard zoo compression scheme is about the same as that of the PKARC 'squashing,' so file sizes are similar. It has a directory list format that shows many files per line, like 'ls'. It has error recovery programs that allow for file extraction from a damaged zoo file. As for disadvantages? You have to be willing to change to a new standard to get these benefits. That's the only one I can think of. -- Paul Homchick {allegra | ihnp4 | rutgers} !cbmvax!cgh!paul Chimitt Gilman Homchick, Inc.; One Radnor Station, Suite 300; Radnor, PA 19087