Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ysub!psuvm!blekul11!ghgaqz4
From: GHGAQZ4@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: WB2.0 question - BRU
Message-ID: <91112.095055GHGAQZ4@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be>
Date: 22 Apr 91 09:48:55 GMT
References: <11839@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>
 <1991Apr21.190721.24994@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Organization: K.U.Leuven - Academic Computing Center
Lines: 9

But BRU is highly inefficient. I sure hope they are going to fix this
for the final (?) version. If you want to see how inefficient it is,
you should try to click on some files, and see how much
the archive grows (below left there is an indicator for that).
For me this is not acceptable. If you add ONE file with size 10K
the archive grows with 20K (this is from memory, I'm not so sure about
the exact numbers).

              Jorrit Tyberghein