Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!ncar!ames!amdahl!drivax!frotz
From: frotz@drivax.UUCP (Frotz)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Standard format for ARCed files
Message-ID: <3238@drivax.UUCP>
Date: 23 Mar 88 16:52:24 GMT
References: <278@syntron.UUCP>
Reply-To: frotz@drivax.UUCP (Frotz)
Followup-To: comp.binaries.ibm.pc
Distribution: na
Organization: Digital Research, Inc., Monterey, California
Lines: 22
Keywords: zoo arc preferences

In article <278@syntron.UUCP> gerry@syntron.UUCP (G. Roderick Singleton) writes:
>I don't see anyone using ZOO.   THERFORE, LET'S USE SEA ARC.

I use zoo exclusively.  I like it because I can retain directory
structures across file systems.  This is **VERY** important to me when
copying sources/objects/executables from one system to another.  The
only feature that I wish (Rahul are you listening?) zoo had is
multi-volume archives (arch.zoo > 2M fitting on 2 hypers or on 8
DSDDs).  Until zoo is expanded to include this capability, I will
continue use Metaware's Find command to create multi-volumne archives
though this is somewhat of a pain. 

I think that the real redeeming features of zoo are: (1) zoo is able
to salvage parts of an archive that has been partially munged and (2)
archive portability.  For this reason I say ZOO should be considered a
strong candidate for this news groups archive format. 

Frotz
--
"Now that we've decided on an archive format, who's going to
moderate;-)"
    -- Me