Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!iucs!bobmon
From: bobmon@iucs.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: PKARC
Message-ID: <4587@iucs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 6-Jul-87 20:09:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: iucs.4587
Posted: Mon Jul  6 20:09:03 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 9-Jul-87 06:34:56 EDT
References: <3187@ptsfa.UUCP>
Reply-To: bobmon@iucs.UUCP (Che' Flamingo)
Organization: Camo Flamingo Liberation Affront
Lines: 22

In article <3187@ptsfa.UUCP> res@ptsfa.UUCP (Bob Stockwell) writes:
>
>What are the symptoms of a Squashed file when using ARC?
>	[...]

I believe that both ARC and PKARC will complain about an "unrecognized
compression method" if they encounter one.  At any rate, the new PKARC would
simply show a Squashed file in its archive listing of the suspect .ARC file.

Speaking of Squashing, I would like to propose a (manual voluntary) work-around
for the recently-complained-about incompatibility problem.  Both ARC and PKARC
will accept archives whose extension is something other than .ARC -- you just
need to specify the entire name-plus-extension.  Accordingly, how about if
archives with Squashed entries are given an extension of .ARS?  (If this
is a bit too racy for you, .ARK or .KRC (for Katz) are alternatives)

Personally, I use PKARC exclusively, for its speed.  However, the Squash method
doesn't improve that much over Crunching, and as someone else pointed out ARC
has been ported to other machines (such as the VAX785 I'm attached to right
now) while PKARC exists only on MSDOS machines.  I think avoiding Squashed
files in public distributions is the way to go, but if they do get out they
should at least be labelled as such.