Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:18044 comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:714 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!uwmcsd1!leah!itsgw!steinmetz!uunet!aocgl!tmanos From: tmanos@aocgl.UUCP (Theodore W. Manos) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d Subject: Re: PK361.EXE Message-ID: <34.UUL1.3#935@aocgl.UUCP> Date: 13 Aug 88 22:03:59 GMT References: <2663@pt.cs.cmu.edu> Organization: Alpha Omega Consulting Group, LTD, Roselle, IL Lines: 14 In article <2663@pt.cs.cmu.edu> ralf@b.gp.cs.cmu.edu (Ralf Brown) writes: > Most of the speed difference comes from the fact that ZOO is written entirely > in C, while PK*** is written mostly in assembler. That's why there are > Unix and VMS versions of ZOO, but not PK***. While admittedly it won't handle Phil's Squashed format, I do have a program running on our VAX (VMS) that *will* unARC .ARC files. I also have a program running on our mainframe (VM/CMS) that will unARC even the Squashed files. Now if Rahul would just run over to his nearest mainframe running VM and do a quick port of ZOO (in C of course :-) ), I'd be perfectly happy to switch to ZOO. -Ted Ted Manos tmanos@aocgl.{COM,UUCP,UU.NET} or ...!{uunet,mcdchg}!aocgl!tmanos