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