Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!ukc!acorn!camcon!igp
From: igp@camcon.co.uk (Ian Phillipps)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: I dont want to start ARC vs ZOO wars again, but.. Re^2: Please use ZOO!
Message-ID: <3306@titan.camcon.co.uk>
Date: 6 Jul 89 12:18:05 GMT
References: <8906292158.AA01546@jade.berkeley.edu> <576@kullmar.se> <564@targon.UUCP>
Organization: Cambridge Consultants Ltd., Cambridge, UK
Lines: 29

andre@targon.UUCP (andre) writes:

>In article <576@kullmar.se> bk@kullmar.se (Bo Kullmar) writes:
.. other >>>> stuff deleted
>more seriously, in comp.binaries ibm pc there are also postings of
>documentation and sources. It is very handy to be able to look into
>an archive before downloading it and spending money on downloading.

You can do that with ARC better - arc5.21 as posted on comp.sources has
a flag to do Unix/MSDOS newline mangling - something which ZOO lacks.

>Also, the pkarc and arc structures have changed over time so that users
>get the 'I think you need a newer version of arc' message and can't
>use the stuff before they get their hands on a new version.

ARC 5.21 and PKUNPAK both decode all .ARC files I've ever come across.
Both have been net-posted in the last year, and are pretty widespread on bbs.

>Zoo is always downward compatible (that's in its copyright notice)

So are ARC/PKUNPAK. It's upwards that's needed!

About the only advantage of ZOO for news postings over the best of the
PAK/ARC programs is its ability to deal with subdirectories.  It has
other advantages in general use, but PKPAK is faster.
-- 
UUCP:  igp@camcon.co.uk   | Cambridge Consultants Ltd  |  Ian Phillipps
or:    igp@camcon.uucp    | Science Park, Milton Road  |-----------------
Phone: +44 223 420024     | Cambridge CB4 4DW, England |