Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!amdcad!ames!nrl-cmf!cmcl2!rutgers!bellcore!tness7!ninja!dalsqnt!rpp386!pigs!haugj
From: haugj@pigs.UUCP (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Archiving Stuff (was: Re: SIMTEL20 to ban ARC files)
Summary: no problem.  don't compress when transmitting, but
	 do compress when storing.
Keywords: archive, compress
Message-ID: <433@pigs.UUCP>
Date: 26 Sep 88 20:40:50 GMT
References: <424@pigs.UUCP> <2054@looking.UUCP> <6605@dasys1.UUCP>
Reply-To: haugj@pigs.UUCP (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: Precision Information, Dallas, TX
Lines: 23

In article <6605@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes:
>In article <2054@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
>>The fact is that for the net compression is not desirable.  It clouds the
>>issue, sometimes *increases* transmission time, and just makes postings
>>harder to deal with.
>
>However, the net is more than its bandwidth -- it is also its component
>sites, and disk space is a resource just like transmission time. No one
>whose spool volume has filled lately is likely to look kindly on doubling
>their archive allocation.

nothing needs to be increased.  add an additional sys line to your news
file like

ARCHIVE:comp.source.misc,comp.sources.unix,comp.binaries.ibm.pc::archivescript

and have archivescript do the compression for you.  you have to keep the
uncompressed version around anyhow, so you aren't losing any more space.
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-The Beach Bum at The Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers-=-=-=-=-=-=
               Very Long Address: John.F.Haugh@rpp386.dallas.tx.us
                         Very Short Address: jfh@rpp386
                           "ANSI C: Just say no" -- Me