Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!rutgers!princeton!phoenix!rjchen
From: rjchen@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Raymond Juimong Chen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Binaries: ARC vs PKARC vs ZOO
Message-ID: <2470@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 10 Apr 88 14:43:09 GMT
References: <24494@clyde.ATT.COM>
Organization: Princeton University, NJ
Lines: 33

In article <230@unsvax.UUCP>, tlhingan@unsvax.UUCP (Eugene Tramaglino) writes:
> Personal Note: I cannot stand pkarc.  I prefer ARC's one (1) program
> that does the job just as well.  I don't like invoking different
> commands to 'v' an archive and 'e' an archive.

You've got to be kidding.  Do you use V.Buerg's ARCE program for
fast de-archiving?  If so, then you have no reason to complain.
Rename PKARC.COM to ARC.COM and PKXARC.COM to ARCE.COM, and
nothing will have changed; except that you'll notice that everything 
happens much much faster than before.

If it STILL bothers you that you have to type two different commands,
you can do the following:

ARC.BAT
	if !%1==!e goto unarc
	pkarc -oct %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9
	goto end
	:unarc
	pkxarc %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9
	:end

There.  Now this ARC.BAT acts *just like the original*; the -oct option
to pkarc guarantees that PKARC will not do any squashing, for those of
you whose UN*X machines can't handle squashed archives.
(Well, I lied when I said it works just like the original.  It's faster.)


-- 
Raymond Chen	UUCP: ...allegra!princeton!{phoenix|pucc}!rjchen
		BITNET: rjchen@phoenix.UUCP, rjchen@pucc
		ARPA: rjchen@phoenix.PRINCETON.EDU
"Say something, please!  ('Yes' would be best.)" - The Doctor