davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) (02/02/90)
I've been looking at LHARC recently to see what the benefits of Yet Another Archiver Archiver is especially over ZOO. The compression algorithms that LHARC employs do seem to lead to better compression than the LZ compression that ZOO uses, but there is two things missing that currently keep me from switching: 1. LHARC doesn't allow comments to be attached to individual files in an archive (at least as far as I can see) like ZOO does. The comments allow me to attach reminders to files rather than to the whole archive which means that I don't have to create a lot of little archives for different sets of files when one file will suffice. 2. More importantly, I'm currently working on Unix and VMS machines as well as my Amiga at home. ZOO has a wider range of platforms supported and, so, I can easily ship ZOO files of software back and forth amongst the machines (VMS is a little tricky, but not that bad ;-). So, my hope is that software put up on comp.(sources|binaries).amiga (as well as elsewhere) continues to be put up in some sort of zoo format at least until a new archiver comes along that meets the following requirements (in decreasing order of importance): 1. More supported operating systems. 2. Better compression algorithms. 3. More flexibility in its options. -- =================================================================== David Masterson Consilium, Inc. uunet!cimshop!davidm Mt. View, CA 94043 =================================================================== "If someone thinks they know what I said, then I didn't say it!"
consp11@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu (Optimist Prime) (02/02/90)
>1. LHARC doesn't allow comments to be attached to individual files in\ an >archive (at least as far as I can see) like ZOO does. The comments\ allow me >to attach reminders to files rather than to the whole archive which\ means that >I don't have to create a lot of little archives for different sets of\ files >when one file will suffice. True. LHARC doesn't support this. But why would you want to put a whole bunch of unrelated files into the same archive in the first place? If the files aren't related in some way, they belong in different archives. Otheriwise it's like having a hard drive with no partitions and a whole bunch of subdirectories called "MISC." >2. More importantly, I'm currently working on Unix and VMS machines\ as well >as my Amiga at home. ZOO has a wider range of platforms supported\ and, so, I >can easily ship ZOO files of software back and forth amongst the\ machines (VMS >is a little tricky, but not that bad ;-). > >So, my hope is that software put up on comp.(sources|binaries).amiga\ (as well >as elsewhere) continues to be put up in some sort of zoo format at\ least until >a new archiver comes along that meets the following requirements (in\ >decreasing order of importance): > >1. More supported operating systems. >2. Better compression algorithms. >3. More flexibility in its options. Yes, ZOO is more widely supported than LHARC is. But how do you expect more platforms to pick up on it if the one it was originally created on won't even deal with it? I, for one, use LHARC for everything. If I come across a ZOO or ARC or PAK or ZIP or any other kind of archived file, I quickly de-archive it and re-archive it with LHARC for uploading and downloading around. ZOO/ARC/PAK don't compress well, ZIP is graphics-only (if it was graphics and CLI, I'd flip for it). So what if LHARC is slow? On a multitasking machine, just type RUN LHARC <...> and go on with your next piece of work. That's what multitasking is all about, isn't it? +-------///--------------------| BRETT KESSLER |--------------------\\\-------+ | /// E-Mail to: consp11@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu \\\ | | /// or try: consp11@bingsuns.pod.binghamton.edu \\\ | | \\\/// and to: consp11@bingvaxa.BITNET \\\/// | | \XX/ or on PeopleLink: B.KESSLER \XX/ | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
mikes@lakesys.lakesys.com (Mike Shawaluk) (02/02/90)
In article <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Feb1111225@uunet.UU.NET> cimshop!davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) writes: >1. LHARC doesn't allow comments to be attached to individual files in an >archive (at least as far as I can see) like ZOO does. The comments allow me >to attach reminders to files rather than to the whole archive which means that >I don't have to create a lot of little archives for different sets of files >when one file will suffice. If you haven't already seen PKAZIP, you will probably like the way that it handles comments; namely, they are imported/exported Amiga file comments! Also, owing to the terrible, memory-hungry, and completely undesirable Intuition-based interface that's employed (please note: sarcasm mode ON for previous statement), you are able to actually EDIT the file comments, and not simply re-enter them (via a text gadget). Also, you can search through one or more .ZIP files for a particular substring in either the file name or the file comment, which could also come in handy. >2. More importantly, I'm currently working on Unix and VMS machines as well >as my Amiga at home. ZOO has a wider range of platforms supported and, so, I >can easily ship ZOO files of software back and forth amongst the machines (VMS >is a little tricky, but not that bad ;-). At this moment, ZOO and ARC certainly have the widest range of available platforms, but soon to be released is a VMS version of PKZIP, which I am working on, under contract to PKWARE, so it will be a full-featured (i.e., not an "extract-only") version. It uses the standard VMS command line interface, but is completely file compatible with .ZIP files produced by MS-DOS and Amiga versions of ZIP. For UN*X, you may have a longer wait, as the only versions I know of in that domain are extract-only; however, I have heard that there is some work being done on a more full-featured UN*X version, but my knowledge in that area is incomplete. -- - Mike Shawaluk "Rarely have we seen a mailer -> DOMAIN: mikes@lakesys.lakesys.com fail which has thoroughly -> UUCP: ...!uunet!marque!lakesys!mikes followed these paths." -> BITNET: 7117SHAWALUK@MUCSD
apang@undergrad.cs.ubc.ca (Anthon 'Amiga' Pang) (02/21/90)
[oops...deleted the attribution...well, hopefully you know who you are :)] >>2. More importantly, I'm currently working on Unix and VMS machines as well >>as my Amiga at home. ZOO has a wider range of platforms supported and, so, I >> [...more stuff deleted...] >>1. More supported operating systems. Lharc was originally written for MSD*S machines. It was later ported to Un*x. And later ported to the Amiga. That's at least 3 operating systems (if you count all the variations of Un*x as 1 :). So far, (to my knowledge) the Un*x version has compiled 'ok' on several BSD4.3 machines--Vax, Sun, Apollo (You can ftp the .zuu Un*x Lharc source code from utsun.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp [133.11.7.250], or I could mail it.) >>2. Better compression algorithms. Lharc certainly has better compression than zoo. Anyone want to tackle the source code with an assembler ? :) Lharc 1.1 is supposedly faster. >>3. More flexibility in its options. Amiga lharc 1.00 has added more options. Or do you mean you'd prefer zoo-like options ? Maybe the author of Amiga zoo is listening...
aliu@nunki.usc.edu (Terminal Entry) (02/21/90)
In article <1990Feb20.210211.4202@undergrad.cs.ubc.ca> apang@undergrad.cs.ubc.ca (Anthon Pang) writes: >Lharc was originally written for MSD*S machines. It was later ported to Un*x. >And later ported to the Amiga. That's at least 3 operating systems (if you >count all the variations of Un*x as 1 :). So far, (to my knowledge) the Un*x >version has compiled 'ok' on several BSD4.3 machines--Vax, Sun, Apollo > >(You can ftp the .zuu Un*x Lharc source code from utsun.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp >[133.11.7.250], or I could mail it.) I have Lharc running on Unix, and it is not really 100% compatible with the amiga version. When trying to un-lharc a Unix-created archive on Amiga, Amiga Lharc (1.xx) complains about not being able to handle CRC32 and some other stuff, and aborts. However, Unix Lharc can archive Amoeba-created archives just fine, except for directory creation. ----- Is it just me, or my versions, or does everybody have this compatibility problem? *** YUCK *** Conclusion: I'll switch to Lharc when both Unix and Amiga versions are EXACTLY the same. (BTW, the Lharc sources I compiled are the ones from comp.sources.atari.st) =============================================================================== | "Life's a bitch... | aliu@nunki.usc.edu | *// Amiga: while my Cray | | and she's back in heat!" | --- Forwarded. --- | \\// is in the shop.... | ===============================================================================