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.