Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!sundc!gouldsd!mjranum
From: mjranum@gouldsd.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: minix - is this a sensible thought ?
Message-ID: <469@gouldsd.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Feb-87 10:17:34 EST
Article-I.D.: gouldsd.469
Posted: Thu Feb  5 10:17:34 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Feb-87 12:30:32 EST
References: <962@osiris.UUCP>, <7619@utzoo.UUCP> <7620@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: Gould Electronics, Landover MD.
Lines: 31
Keywords: file transfer formats, etc, etc.
Summary: more file transfer stuff.

In article <7620@utzoo.UUCP>, henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes:
> Incidentally, if one *must* do compression on things to be sent over the
> network, please do *NOT* reinvent the wheel one more time with yet another
> different compression program.  "Compress", published in mod.sources a while
> ago, is the thing to use. 

	I agree. Compress is excellent. I submit that if something is so
big it has to be compressed, it's better to send it in a floppy mailer
unless there is a huge demand. If I recall my sequence right:

1) I take binaries and sources and shar/tar them
2) I compress the output
3) I uuencode it.
4) I post it
5) news takes it, spools it, *COMPRESSES* it, and sends it.
6) news receives it, decompresses it, etc...
7) I receive it
8) I uudecode it
9) I decompress it
10) I unshar it.
11) Now I can have fun.

	There has *GOT* to be a better way ! Even at the expense of
space, maybe we should give some thought to minimizing the # of steps ?
It was this possibly erroneous thinking that led me to suggest that
we limit ourselves to tar(1), shar, or floppy mailer format.

++mjr;
-- 
"It is better to shred the bugger than to bugger the shredder."
					-ancient doltic proverb.