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