driscoll@eecae.UUCP (Mike Driscoll) (08/09/88)
I know that this has been discussed before, but with all the litigation between Phil Katz and SEA now completed, maybe now's the time. Can we decide (in some manner) to switch from using ARC and whatever Phil Katz will call his code to using ZOO for comp.binaries.ibm.pc? Maybe my memory is a little unclear, but I recall voting for a moderator, but not for an archive format. The binaries and source for MS-DOS and UNIX ZOO could both be distributed in the binaries group and everybody should be able to make use of them. The only problem I see in the switch is it being interpreted as lack of support for Phil Katz or for SEA. I have my own opinion on that, but I'd just like to use something that does the job, is readily accesible, and is free. Rahul perhaps has some conflict of interest here, but maybe he can comment on a good procedure for deciding this. Again, I'm not trying to start a war about who should have won the lawsuit, or anything like that. It has always seemed to me that ZOO was a good choice for the binaries newsgroup. (I get sick of running TAR and ARC/PKARC to capture directory structures, for example.) Maybe the confusion over the law suit (or the clarity resulting from the law suit) makes this a good time to switch. -- Michael A. Driscoll UUCP: ...uunet!mimsy!ames!philabs!fmsrl7!eecae!driscoll Dept. of Electrical Engineering ARPA: driscoll@eecae.ee.msu.edu (35.8.8.151) Michigan State University Office: (517) 353-5337 E. Lansing, MI, 48824
davidsen@steinmetz.ge.com (William E. Davidsen Jr) (08/10/88)
In article <10635@eecae.UUCP> driscoll@eecae.UUCP (Mike Driscoll) writes: | | I know that this has been discussed before, but with all the | litigation between Phil Katz and SEA now completed, maybe now's the | time. | | Can we decide (in some manner) to switch from using ARC and | whatever Phil Katz will call his code to using ZOO for | comp.binaries.ibm.pc? Sure, start sending submissions in zoo format. I have been using zoo format for most of the stuff on my BBS for a year or so, keeping ARC if that's the way things were uploaded. I don't post *anything* in PK format, since I can't use it under UNIX. Anything in that format goes on a queue to be reformatted. -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
dale@ncoast.ORG (Dale Smith) (03/03/89)
I vote for zoo. Subdirectories are wonderfull!
--
Dale P. Smith dale@ncoast.org
Good judgement comes from experience, ncoast!dale@hal.cwru.edu
and experience comes from bad judgement. uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!dale
-- Fred Brooksbanshee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Wailin Through The Nets) (03/04/89)
In article <13432@ncoast.ORG> dale@ncoast.ORG (Dale Smith) writes: >I vote for zoo. Subdirectories are wonderfull! > Pkzip does subdirectories. \|/ | John Vinopal | SPAMSPAMSPAMSPAM -S-atan | Pseudo-Satanist at Santa Cruz | EATEATEATEATEATEAT /|\ | banshee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU | 666SPAM666SPAM666 | ucbvax!ucscc!ucscb!banshee | SANTA == SATAN
jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright) (03/06/89)
In article <6584@saturn.ucsc.edu> banshee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Wailin Through The Nets) writes: |In article <13432@ncoast.ORG> dale@ncoast.ORG (Dale Smith) writes: |>I vote for zoo. Subdirectories are wonderfull! |> | Pkzip does subdirectories. Not on Unix. Not on the Amiga. When it does that, it may be considered for wonderfullness. -- Jim Wright jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu
karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) (03/06/89)
In article <6584@saturn.ucsc.edu> banshee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Wailin Through The Nets) writes: >In article <13432@ncoast.ORG> dale@ncoast.ORG (Dale Smith) writes: >>I vote for zoo. Subdirectories are wonderfull! > Pkzip does subdirectories. And only runs on MSDOS. Give me a _standard_ that I can use across Unix, Xenix, VMS and MSDOS machines _today_, not Phil Katz's newest toy and money-making product. -- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, ddsw1!karl) Data: [+1 312 566-8912], Voice: [+1 312 566-8910] Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality solutions at a fair price"
hpchang@tiger.waterloo.edu (I'm a Wild One) (03/06/89)
In article <854@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright) writes: >In article <6584@saturn.ucsc.edu> banshee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Wailin Through The Nets) writes: >|In article <13432@ncoast.ORG> dale@ncoast.ORG (Dale Smith) writes: >|>I vote for zoo. Subdirectories are wonderfull! >|> >| Pkzip does subdirectories. > >Not on Unix. Not on the Amiga. When it does that, it may be ^^^^ ^^^^^ Pretty amazing since pkZIP hasn't been released for either the Amiga or Unix systems yet. For something to work on a operating system before it has even been written is VERY impressive. ZIP's got my vote.
leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) (03/08/89)
In article <12059@watdragon.waterloo.edu> hpchang@tiger.waterloo.edu (I'm a Wild One) writes: <In article <854@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright) writes: <>In article <6584@saturn.ucsc.edu> banshee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Wailin Through The Nets) writes: <>|In article <13432@ncoast.ORG> dale@ncoast.ORG (Dale Smith) writes: <>|>I vote for zoo. Subdirectories are wonderfull! <>|> <>| Pkzip does subdirectories. <> <>Not on Unix. Not on the Amiga. When it does that, it may be < ^^^^ ^^^^^ < <Pretty amazing since pkZIP hasn't been released for either the Amiga or Unix <systems yet. For something to work on a operating system before it has even <been written is VERY impressive. ZIP's got my vote. PKZIP isn't in the running. The *only* alternatives are to keep using the old version of ARC that Rahul has on his *nix box, or switch to zoo. No others need apply. There are several reasons for this. 1. the program *must* be avaible on *nix or Rahul can't moderate effectively. This also makes it easier for the folks who have to "massage" the files before downloading them from their news account to their PC. 2. It would help if it is available for a wide variety of systems, as not all sites are running *nix. Source is a plus here. This means it can be ported easily. (this follows from ther second part of #1) 3. The software must be available *now*. This lets out PKZIP as it does not at present meet #1. 4. The change must make things *easier*. If we don't gain anything, why change. By the way, your vote was wasted... votes must be *mailed*, not posted!!! I'll be voting for zoo as soon as I can convince our mailer to send the vote (I hate being stuck with bang paths!). If I need to archive files I use zoo. Because I need to get files from various bbs systems I have to keep copies of other software around. My latest count of formats is 5 that I've run across *not* counting zoo. I going to just stick them all on a floppy to save space. Or maybe I'll zoo them and use "looz xx <filename> <archive>" to run them... -- Leonard Erickson ...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard CIS: [70465,203] "I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters." -- Solomon Short
malpass@vlsi.ll.mit.edu (Don Malpass) (03/08/89)
In article <12059@watdragon.waterloo.edu> hpchang@tiger.waterloo.edu (I'm a Wild One) writes: > >Pretty amazing since pkZIP hasn't been released for either the Amiga or Unix >systems yet. For something to work on a operating system before it has even >been written is VERY impressive. ZIP's got my vote. How's that again??? What you stated sounds like another reason for NOT voting for PK. If you always vote for the unknown I can probably part with some swamp land in Florida for only a few $K per acre. IT's bug-free also! -- Don Malpass [malpass@LL-vlsi.arpa], [malpass@gandalf.ll.mit.edu] Have you noticed how little difference there often seems to be between ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE and REAL STUPIDITY?
paul@cgh.UUCP (Paul Homchick) (03/12/89)
>>I vote for zoo. Subdirectories are wonderfull! >> > Pkzip does subdirectories. Zoo has been 'doing' subdirectories for two years. PK's squashing (a.k.a. 13-bit LZW) was also an idea borrowed from zoo. However, as much as the work of Phil Katz and Rahul Dhesi converge, zoo is still FREE with the source freely available, while PKZIP is still commercial. THE SEA vs PK flap was primarily due to competeing commercial interests. The lesson I drew from that sorry affair was that our net-tools should be public domain with freely available source, just like comp.sources; and fully in the mainstream of the unix tradition. -- Paul Homchick :UUCP : {rutgers | uunet} !cbmvax!cgh!paul Chimitt Gilman Homchick, Inc. :Internet: cgh!paul@manta.pha.pa.us 259 Radnor-Chester Rd, Suite 140 :MCI : PHOMCHICK Radnor, PA 19087-5299 :GEnie : HOMCHICK
rusty@cadnetix.COM (Rusty) (03/15/89)
In article <1294@bucket.UUCP> leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) writes: >PKZIP isn't in the running. The *only* alternatives are to keep using >the old version of ARC that Rahul has on his *nix box, or switch to >zoo. No others need apply. > It is for this reason that I have sent a "lets wait" vote off. I have looked at the docs for the structure of the zip archives, and they are *designed* to allow archive files to cross floppy boundaries. In fact, they are designed to allow any ***FILE*** in an archive to cross floppy boundaries! I have been working on a 'nifty-keen multi-floppy backup program', (very slowly, I ran into some snags, an case anyone remembers last year when I was working on it.... sorry for the long delay) and now that I see the underlying structure of zip, I'm waiting a bit longer to fight those problems I've been dealing with. So, rather than switch **NOW**, I suggest that we wait a bit and see what happens with zip. Sure, the code for zip will most likely not be released. However, docs are included in the distribution (I've got it at home, and am considering posting it, but it is HUGE (50k, I think, I'll have to look)), and I fully expect someone who knows something about compression to be able to figure out the algorithm and write some code which will be released for those who want to decode on *nix machines. Then, you'll have everything - multiple floppy backup, *nix execution, subdirectory traversal, small archives. Oh, and zip will automatically skip the self-extracting code of a self-extracting executable so you can get a table of contents list of a self-extracting archive (or, at least, thats what I understood the doc to say). Now, for the disclaimers: I think we have an excellent moderator. The issue of which archiver to use should ***not*** be taken to mean anyone thinks that he is somehow not doing a good job. And zoo is a great program, I have used it at home (but have had to convert the few files I had zoo'd (?) back to pk(x)arc since a file maintenance program I am trying out knows the pk(x)arc format only). While I realize that switching to zoo would make his job easier, it seems to me that switching now is not a good idea at this point in time. We don't have enough info yet on the 'new zip'. Maybe in a month or 10 we will have something to look at and make a reasonable decision about. Switching now would mean that, once real info is available, we will either have to not switch to a superior system (assuming that zip reaches its potential :-), or we will switch and make everybody convert all their archives to ***yet another*** format! What do the archive sites have to say about the issue? They would be involved in converting to the new format, maybe even twice. The feelings of the people involved in maintaining the archives should carry more weight than any single net-resident, it seems to me. 'nuf said for now. I'll go back into the woodwork :-). ----- Rusty Carruth UUCP:{uunet,boulder}!cadnetix!rusty DOMAIN: rusty@cadnetix.com Cadnetix Corp. (303) 444-8075x241 \ 5775 Flatiron Pkwy. \ Boulder, Co 80301 Radio: N7IKQ 'home': P.O.B. 461 \ Lafayette, CO 80026
lal@tc.fluke.COM (Larry Lohkamp) (03/17/89)
I also cannot get mail through to Roy. Could some one with a path to him let him know that there are 6 ports here that would like to see zoo take over. It would be nice not to have to convert everything from arc to zoo here. Yes thats all we use folks.
msschaa@cs.vu.nl (Schaap MS) (04/27/89)
I have a problem. A lot of people use zoo nowadays, but I can't find a copy of ZOO somewhere. Could somebody please Email me one? Thank you.
twb@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (thomas.w.beattie) (05/30/89)
In article <7461@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Rahul Dhesi) writes: ># Future postings in this newsgroup will be mostly in zoo archive ># format. When was this decided? I thought the vote showed fairly weak support for Zoo and more support for continuing with ARC. --- Tom Beattie att!hoqaa!twb t.w.beattie@att.com ------------------------------------------------ Dem bats is smart, they use radar -The Dumb Guy ------------------------------------------------
torchins@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (06/01/89)
I think you're right. When a friend of mine recieved a computer, and all the programs he needed, they were in .ARC format. Also, the well known Pc-Tools supports are as well as other programs that cost more than a 10-year comatose hippo.
mdlawler@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Mike Lawler) (06/01/89)
In article <120800003@silver>, torchins@silver.bacs.indiana.edu writes: > > I think you're right. When a friend of mine recieved a computer, and all > the programs he needed, they were in .ARC format. Also, the well known Pc-Tools > supports are as well as other programs that cost more than a 10-year comatose > hippo. This doesn't prove that arc is the best thing to use. I really don't understand why the human race is so relucant to change. People usually look at new products like this: I don't care if the new product is better because I'm used to what I'm using. If we always used this sort of absurd logic then progress, as we know it, would not exist. Arc doesn't have the features that zoo has. Arc is older and more widely distributed than zoo so of course its going to be used more, but that in no way means that it is the best program for the job. Arc is not as portable as zoo. It also isn't supported by an author that is willing to distribute the source code and make suggested changes sent to him by users. If we used the logic "use arc because the majority of people do" then we would still be using typewriters and calculators and as a blind person I can personally say that using these machines compared to computers is very frustrating. Also just because c.b.i.p uses zoo doesn't mean that you are going to be forced to delete your copy of arc. You can keep it around to extract files in the .arc format. Also people on this net should remember that arc had to get its start somewhere. Finally for the people that complain that zoo is too slow if your so worried about it then write highly optimized assembler routines for your prefered machine and send them to Rahul. He would probably consider putting them into zoo. Look at the source code for MS-DOS zoo and you'll find that it has assembler routines in it for speed. rahul has provided the world with a portable package and people are still complaining about it being slow, but most of them aren't optimizing the source code that he freely distributes and sending the optimized code to him so they don't need to complain. This type of complaining is analogious to someone that complains about the government all of the time, but never votes. -- Mike Lawler UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!mdlawler ARPA: mdlawler@bsu-cs.bsu.edu
burleigh@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (frank burleigh) (06/02/89)
In article <7525@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> mdlawler@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Mike Lawler) writes: >In article <120800003@silver>, torchins@silver.bacs.indiana.edu writes: >> >> I think you're right. When a friend of mine recieved a computer, and all >> the programs he needed, they were in .ARC format. Also, the well known Pc-Tools > >This type of complaining is analogious to someone that complains >about the government all of the time, but never votes. >-- I would love to switch to ZOO *when* its speed approaches ZIP and when its compression improves. I saved a lot of space by switching from ARC to ZIP. I think Mike forgots that many of us do not program in assembly. It seems clear to me that Rahul might well add-in LZH compression and that there may be a faster implementation of that. If that is true, I wonder why we didn't change when the improvements are ready. Frank Burleigh burleigh@silver.bacs.indiana.edu USENET: ...rutgers!iuvax!silver!burleigh BITNET: BURLEIGH@IUBACS.BITNET Department of Sociology, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405
dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Rahul Dhesi) (06/02/89)
I hope everybody will keep in mind that there are two related but
distinct issues here.
Issue 1:
Usenet is made up mostly of UNIX machines, with a few MS-DOS systems
on it and some email subscribers who use VMS and other systems.
Because of lack of availability of portable versions of other
archivers, the only contenders were arc and zoo formats. And after
extensive discussion (and two polls, one in May 1988 and another in
March 1989) a switch to zoo format seemed to me to be more useful.
Issue 2:
What archiver people use on their own machines will depend on their
individual priorities. Choices include pak (gsarc), arc, zoo, zip,
pkarc, dwc, lharc, and probably others.
A number of utilities have been posted in comp.binaries.ibm.pc that
will allow users to convert between different archive formats.
--
Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu>
UUCP: ...!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesi
Career change search is on -- ask me for my resumehook@coho.ee.ubc.ca (Chris Hook) (06/05/89)
I would like to find out where I can get the Zoo file compress/decompress
program for the PC? I imagine its available via some anonymous ftp connection.
Thanks for telling me where it is.
p.s. - I read Rahul's response and I see his reasoning on switching to
the zoo file compression format, but I find that most installations
(at least the many that I come in contact with) readily have at
hand extraction programs for .ARC and .ZIP files, but .ZOO is
another story.ts@chyde.uwasa.fi (Timo Salmi LASK) (06/06/89)
In article <287@fs1.ee.ubc.ca> hook@coho.ee.ubc.ca (Chris Hook) writes: >I would like to find out where I can get the Zoo file compress/decompress >program for the PC? I imagine its available via some anonymous ftp connection. You can get it as /pc/pd2/zoo201.exe from our site. Rahul posted it quite recently in comp.binaries.ibm.pc, so that is another option. I would think that Simtel20 has it too. While you are at it, it is useful to get zoo for Unix as well. We have that too, but I do not recall outright in which directory, since I moderate only part of our ftp directories (/pc/pd2 and /pc/ts). ................................................................... Prof. Timo Salmi (Site 128.214.12.3) School of Business Studies, University of Vaasa, SF-65101, Finland Internet: ts@chyde.uwasa.fi Funet: vakk::salmi Bitnet: salmi@finfun
w8sdz@smoke.BRL.MIL (Keith Petersen) (06/07/89)
ZOO201.EXE (the revised version recently posted) is available from
SIMTEL20 in directory PD1:<MSDOS.ZOO>. SIMTEL20 accepts anonymous FTP
with usename GUEST (actually any printing characters will do). BITNET
users may request the file via LISTSERV@NDSUVM or LISTSERV@RPIECS.
--
Keith Petersen
Maintainer of SIMTEL20's CP/M, MSDOS, and MISC archives
Internet: w8sdz@WSMR-SIMTEL20.Army.Mil [26.2.0.74]
Uucp: {ames,decwrl,harvard,rutgers,ucbvax,uunet}!wsmr-simtel20.army.mil!w8sdzjbjones@marlin.NOSC.MIL (John B. Jones) (06/07/89)
In article <559@chyde.uwasa.fi> ts@chyde.uwasa.fi (Timo Salmi LASK) writes: >I would think that Simtel20 has it too. While you are at it, it is >useful to get zoo for Unix as well. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ This would be a nice thing to have. If anyone here in southern california has such a beast, could they send it to me? Please don't send it archived with zoo :-). Gazing at my screen in fond hopes, jbjones@marlin.nosc.mil
16012_3045@uwovax.uwo.ca (Paul Gomme) (06/07/89)
In article <7525@bsu-cs.bsu.edu>, mdlawler@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Mike Lawler) writes: > I really don't > understand why the human race is so relucant to change. People > usually look at new products like this: I don't care if the new > product is better because I'm used to what I'm using. [long diatribe deleted] Would you start using word processor ABC if it were 5% better than the word processor which you already know and love? I think not. Each individual must make his/her own evaluation as to the costs and benefits of a change. Personally, I don't see enough benefits to changing to ZOO. > Arc is not as portable as zoo. This _might_ be right. However, I'd like to see evidence supporting this statement. Also, ZOO under VAX/VMS is almost worthless. I have to "bilf" the file when I transfer between VAX/VMS and any other system (eg. MS-DOS). I know that there are problems with VAX C. But I have two utilities which deal with ARC files under VMS. Also, ZOO tends to mess up severely CR/LF combinations. > Finally for the people that complain that zoo is too slow if your > so worried about it then write highly optimized assembler routines > for your prefered machine and send them to Rahul. This has got to be the worst argument of the lot. There are already utilities which work and are acceptably fast in dealing with ARC files. Why do you expect someone to run out and rewrite a bunch of code when there's a tool which already works? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Gomme Bitnet: gomme@uwovax.bitnet ARPA: gomme@uwo.ca
dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Rahul Dhesi) (06/08/89)
(Moving this discussion from comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d to comp.os.vms, since this is a VMS-specific issue.) In article <2282@uwovax.uwo.ca> 16012_3045@uwovax.uwo.ca (Paul Gomme) writes: >Also, ZOO under VAX/VMS is almost worthless. I have to "bilf" the >file when I transfer between VAX/VMS and any other system (eg. MS-DOS). The problem lies in VAX/VMS Kermit, which tries to be intelligent about when to perform newline conversions. It incorrectly assumes that all stream-LF files are text files. And it won't allow you to use the command "set file type binary" to override this assumption. The result is a corrupted download. Other file transfer programs, such as zmodem, should not have this problem. -- Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> UUCP: ...!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesi Career change search is on -- ask me for my resume
kaires@hubcap.clemson.edu (Robert G Kaires) (06/09/89)
I know I'm behind the times but I'm still using pkarc and pkxarc. I just noticed that the posting on comp.binaries.ibm.pc are mostly "zooed". The question is where can I get this zoo program. I tried FTPing to Clarkson and downloaded something called zoo201.exe using type "binaries" (or was it "binary"). Anyway something was downloaded. It crashes my 'puter hard (have to do a cold boot). Any help is appreciated. (eg. is zoo available somewhere else, etc) Bob Kaires
johnm@spudge.UUCP (John Munsch) (06/09/89)
In article <2282@uwovax.uwo.ca> 16012_3045@uwovax.uwo.ca (Paul Gomme) writes: >This has got to be the worst argument of the lot. There are already utilities >which work and are acceptably fast in dealing with ARC files. Why do you >expect someone to run out and rewrite a bunch of code when there's a tool which >already works? > >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Paul Gomme Bitnet: gomme@uwovax.bitnet ARPA: gomme@uwo.ca This is one of the fundamental mistakes that people so often make when comparing archivers, uuencoders, or anything else where a standard exists. It "already works". No, it doesn't, it "already works" for YOU. Those of us who deal with Amigas, Xenix boxes, and other operating systems that have long file names or a need to archive more than just a flat structure of files (i.e. whole directory trees) have had to deal with a profusion of unpleasant kludge scripts and programs to get around the problems of ARC. I got sick of it and changed, I've been very happy since and I only have to use ONE program on all the machines I work on (VAX, Amiga, PC's, and Xenix Box)...zoo. BTW, here's a question I must ask of all of you out there who have been advocating the, "Let's stick with ARC," point of view. SEA wholly and completely owns the ARC format, the courts said so. Thus it doesn't really matter what archiver you are using, if it puts out ARC format or decodes ARC format then you should be paying SEA a fee for its use. Have YOU paid them? Do you actually expect the rest of the net to stick with a format that we LEGALLY have to pay to use? If so, do you also wait up for Santa Claus? John Munsch
16012_3045@uwovax.uwo.ca (Paul Gomme) (06/12/89)
In article <1164@spudge.UUCP>, johnm@spudge.UUCP (John Munsch) writes: > This is one of the fundamental mistakes that people so often make when > comparing archivers, uuencoders, or anything else where a standard exists. > It "already works". No, it doesn't, it "already works" for YOU. ... deleted ... > I got sick of > it and changed, I've been very happy since and I only have to use ONE program > on all the machines I work on (VAX, Amiga, PC's, and Xenix Box)...zoo. Fine. Give me a copy of ZOO which works on VAX/VMS _without_ the kludge of having to use BILF. > SEA wholly and > completely owns the ARC format, the courts said so. At the risk of initiating a dispute which I suspect neither of us is able to settle, I suspect that the courts have not, in fact, said that SEA owns the ARC format. There was no judgement, and so the courts cannot have made a decision. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Gomme Bitnet: gomme@uwovax.bitnet ARPA: gomme@uwo.ca
opergb@emily.uvm.edu (G. Bushey-ROTC Puke) (06/12/89)
I have been away from the net for some time and it seems that I need the newwst version of zoo. Would some kind soul please send me a copy so that I amy use the new programs? Thank you Gary Bushey opergb@uvm-gen
jms@hcx.uucp (Michael Stanley) (06/13/89)
In article <2304@uwovax.uwo.ca>, 16012_3045@uwovax.uwo.ca (Paul Gomme) writes: > > At the risk of initiating a dispute which I suspect neither of us is able to > settle, I suspect that the courts have not, in fact, said that SEA owns the ARC > format. There was no judgement, and so the courts cannot have made a decision. Ah come on. Lets not nitpick! It doesn't matter EXACTLY what the courts decide, the MEANING behind the man's original statement was that WE can't write programs which can access ARC format archives without SEA's permission. On the other hand, this is not true for zoo. With zoo we (or someone else) are free to write a zoo archive program on ANY system any time we feel like it. This means that there is a greater liklihood of finding zoo available on a greater variety of operating systems in the future (assuming zoo catches on). And finally, I don't really care which archive program we use. Downloading software is always a pain even if you have command/batch/shell-script files to handle most of the job for you. I doubt we'll ever find an answer that will satisfy all of us. Michael jms@hcx.uucp
16012_3045@uwovax.uwo.ca (Paul Gomme) (06/13/89)
In article <2571@cveg.uucp>, jms@hcx.uucp (Michael Stanley) writes: > > In article <2304@uwovax.uwo.ca>, 16012_3045@uwovax.uwo.ca (Paul Gomme) writes: >> >> At the risk of initiating a dispute which I suspect neither of us is able to >> settle, I suspect that the courts have not, in fact, said that SEA owns the ARC >> format. There was no judgement, and so the courts cannot have made a decision. > > Ah come on. Lets not nitpick! It doesn't matter EXACTLY what the courts > decide, the MEANING behind the man's original statement was that WE can't > write programs which can access ARC format archives without SEA's permission. I'm not picking nits. Let's suppose that someone with a big pocketbook decides to write programs which access the ARC format without SEA's permission. I'm certain that such an individual or organization could eventually cause SEA to give up their legal action. > On the other hand, this is not true for zoo. With zoo we (or someone else) > are free to write a zoo archive program on ANY system any time we feel like > it. This means that there is a greater liklihood of finding zoo available > on a greater variety of operating systems in the future (assuming zoo catches > on). And this comes back to my original posting on ZOO. An acceptable ZOO _does_not_ exits for VAX/VMS. Rahul _claims_ that the fault is with Kermit. This is completely false. I took a uuencoded file, unencoded it, and ran my VMS ZOO on the file. It puked. I ran BILF on the file, and it ran fine. Having to run BILF on ZOO files is not an acceptable option. Rewriting VMS ZOO so that it works correctly is the appropriate action. Unfortunately, I'm not up to the task (I gave up using the VMS C compiler some time ago on exactly the issue of file access). Finally, I seriously question whether ZOO would be used for comp.binaries.ibm.pc were it not for the fact that the moderator wrote ZOO. This is not a flame, but merely my opinion. I would be quite happy to use ZOO if it worked on VMS. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Gomme Bitnet: gomme@uwovax.bitnet ARPA: gomme@uwo.ca
hull@dinl.uucp (Jeff Hull) (06/13/89)
In article <2571@cveg.uucp> jms@hcx.uucp (Michael Stanley) writes: >Ah come on. Lets not nitpick! It doesn't matter EXACTLY what the courts >decide, the MEANING behind the man's original statement was that WE can't >write programs which can access ARC format archives without SEA's permission. Not true, Michael. You or I or anyone else is legally free to write his or her own program to de-archive files from an ARC-format archive without SEA's permission provided: (1) we do not make commercial use of the program; and (2) we do not use any SEA-developed, proprietary software in or as the basis of our program. We could also legally give copies of the program to anyone we wish. These rights are well-established by statute and precedent. Of course, SEA has the right to challenge, in court, any behavior they feel is detrimental to their (corporate) well-being and we would have the right to defend our behavior. Of course, this costs money and since, in the scenario I have described, there is no financial benefit to us we would have to question whether this is a worthwhile expenditure of our resources. I suspect this had a lot to do with the outcome of the SEA-PK court case. Of course, it is possible that PK could not PROVE to the court that his archivers met condition (2) described above. -- Blessed Be, Jeff Hull ...!ncar!dinl!hull 1544 S. Vaughn Circle 303-750-3538 It was great when it all begaaaaan, Aurora, CO 80012 I was a regular <USENET> faaaan, ....
scjones@sdrc.UUCP (Larry Jones) (06/14/89)
In article <2571@cveg.uucp>, jms@hcx.uucp (Michael Stanley) writes: > Ah come on. Lets not nitpick! It doesn't matter EXACTLY what the courts > decide, the MEANING behind the man's original statement was that WE can't > write programs which can access ARC format archives without SEA's permission. Not true -- SEA has explicitly stated that anyone at all, except for PKWARE, can use the ARC file format. ---- Larry Jones UUCP: uunet!sdrc!scjones SDRC scjones@SDRC.UU.NET 2000 Eastman Dr. BIX: ltl Milford, OH 45150-2789 AT&T: (513) 576-2070 "You can't get a body like mine in a bottle -- unless you push REAL HARD." - Judy Tenuta / Dr. Pepper
ephram@violet.berkeley.edu (07/12/89)
Thanks to all who responded to my plea for a BSD zoo. I found one on uunet.uu.net but it was not in the directory that the poster said it was in. It was in /pub and the file name was zoo201.tar.Z. All uncompressed and untar'd ok :-) and I am hapily ZOOming along. We must prevent those commies from compromising the integrity of our precious bodily fluids. -Gen. Jack D. Ripper Ephram Cohen ephram@violet.berkeley.edu 466 44th St. #1 3210 Tolman Hall Oakland, CA 94609 Berkeley, CA 94720
mgm@mercury.sybase.com (Michal G. McKenna) (07/19/89)
Where can I get a copy of "zoo" for Sun and/or PC's ?
Thanx!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Michael G. McKenna ** My opinions are always my own **
OEM Engineering, Sybase Inc.
{mtxinu,sun,pyramid,pacbell,lll-tis}!sybase!mgm mgm@sybase.comkorsberg@abaa.uucp (Ed Korsberg) (10/24/89)
I am a new user of news and have enjoyed reading the various topics of discussion. Concerning the program ZOO, how can I obtain a copy of the program and/or the source files? Any help in this matter would be greatly appreciated. -- Ed Korsberg
kdq@demott.COM (Kevin D. Quitt) (02/21/90)
Is someone willing to send me the zoo decompressor? I don't have ftp capability (yet). thanks, kdq -- Kevin D. Quitt Manager, Software Development DeMott Electronics Co. VOICE (818) 988-4975 14707 Keswick St. FAX (818) 997-1190 Van Nuys, CA 91405-1266 MODEM (818) 997-4496 Telebit PEP last 34 12 N 118 27 W srhqla!demott!kdq kdq@demott.com
bob@pds3 (Robert A. Earl) (02/22/90)
In article <34@demott.COM> kdq@demott.COM (Kevin D. Quitt) writes: | | Is someone willing to send me |the zoo decompressor? I don't have ftp capability (yet). | |thanks, |kdq | |Kevin D. Quitt Manager, Software Development |DeMott Electronics Co. VOICE (818) 988-4975 |14707 Keswick St. FAX (818) 997-1190 |Van Nuys, CA 91405-1266 MODEM (818) 997-4496 Telebit PEP last |34 12 N 118 27 W srhqla!demott!kdq kdq@demott.com me too! -- ============== Robert A. Earl uunet!pds3!bob
stever@modcomp.UUCP (02/24/90)
| Is someone willing to send me |the zoo decompressor? I don't have ftp capability (yet). | me too, please! -- ============== Steve Rotolo uunet!modcomp!stever