Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!cornell!batcomputer!sun.soe.clarkson.edu!dave
From: dave@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Dave Goldblatt)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Standard format for ARCed files
Message-ID: <556@sun.soe.clarkson.edu>
Date: 15 Mar 88 18:36:57 GMT
References: <6127@bellcore.bellcore.com>
Distribution: na
Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY
Lines: 32

From article <6127@bellcore.bellcore.com>, by tr@wind.bellcore.com (tom reingold):
>  [various comments about standards removed]

> While I think it does not make things peachy since most people do
> have ARC or PKARC, I think using MAKESFX is a good idea because it
> can save trouble for those who don't have an un-archiving program.
> And it does not make the archive unreadable on Unix.  You just have
> to chop the program off the top of the archive.  This is done very
> easily with tail.  The program is always 9758 bytes long.

Surprise!  That's only with MAKESFX; there lurks a program which makes
self-extracting files from ARC 5.21 files as well.  I doubt that it
is also 9758 bytes long.

To be honest, ARC and PKX35A35 are available from enough sources so
that anyone that doesn't have either one can pick it up very easily.
I don't see where a large incompatibility should be invoked for the <1%
of users who would be inconvenienced by postings in straight archive
format.

Besides which, I've got a Unix Arc which sometimes reads squashed archives,
but not consistently.  Many other sites are in the same boat.  For
MAXIMUM compatibility, ARC or PKARC with the -oct option should be used.
No self-extracting, no squashing.

-dg-

-- 

Internet: dave@sun.soe.clarkson.edu    or:   dave@clutx.clarkson.edu
BITNET:   dave@CLUTX.Bitnet            uucp: {rpics, gould}!clutx!dave
Matrix:   Dave Goldblatt @ 1:260/360   ICBM: Why do you want to know? :-)