Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pacbell!att!alberta!access!edm!dragos!ruiu From: ruiu@dragos.UUCP (Dragos Ruiu) Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d Subject: Re: A Dumb Idea Summary: The advantage to ZOO is that is transportable... Message-ID: <425@dragos.UUCP> Date: 18 Aug 88 17:08:29 GMT References: <17362@gatech.edu> Organization: UNIX Device, Canada Lines: 24 In article <17362@gatech.edu>, jkg@gatech.edu (Jim Greenlee) writes: > In reading the discussion about ARC vs. PK{ARC|PAK} vs. ZOO, a thought occurred > to me that I have never seen addressed in this newsgroup: > > What exactly is it that people have against compressed tar files? > > Many have been urging the adoption of ZOO because it supports hierarchical > archives - tar handles this. > Jim Greenlee - Instructor, School of ICS, Georgia Tech jkg@gatech.edu The advantage to ZOO as I see it is that it will support this on all its versions, and would be transportable, whereas compress/tar would assume you could get those utilities on MSDOS/VMS/Whatever...(Which you can, but it is more difficult than tracking down ZOO, which is conveniently enough authored by the moderator.) It would add to the hassle, and it would make it more difficult for people who are just starting out. (P.S. I agree with everyone else that ZOO sources should be posted...) -- Dragos Ruiu ruiu@dragos.UUCP "We will probably never announce a processor ...alberta!dragos!ruiu as a RISC processor."-Ken Olsen ...wanna bet?