Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!unido!laura!tommy!klute
From: klute@tommy.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (Rainer Klute)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: What archiving format?
Message-ID: <3580@laura.UUCP>
Date: 27 Jun 91 12:04:38 GMT
References: <3564@laura.UUCP> <1991Jun21.152722.17873@newcastle.ac.uk> <A0b7mrze@nathan.ruhr.de>
Sender: news@laura.UUCP
Distribution: comp
Organization: University of Dortmund, Germany
Lines: 20

In article <A0b7mrze@nathan.ruhr.de>, ue@nathan.ruhr.de (Udo Erdelhoff) writes:
|> You haven't ever used LHArc 1.1321, have you? Give it a try and start 
|> thinkig about using LHArc again...

Whatever the advantages of LHArc 1.1321 might be (faster?), it does solve
the problem of those many incompatible LHarcs. Using LHarc of whatever
version could only under the following conditions be tolerated:

- There is only one LHarc version at a time.
- The source code is maintained by a single person or team.
- The source code is completely written in C (no assembly
  "optimizations").
- The source code is suitable for most (better: all) machines and
  operating systems.

-- 
  Dipl.-Inform. Rainer Klute      klute@irb.informatik.uni-dortmund.de
  Univ. Dortmund, IRB             klute@unido.uucp, klute@unido.bitnet
  Postfach 500500         |)|/    Tel.: +49 231 755-4663
D-4600 Dortmund 50        |\|\    Fax : +49 231 755-2386