Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!lll-winken!uunet!cadnetix.COM!cadnetix!rusty
From: rusty@cadnetix.COM (Rusty)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: zoo
Summary: why the rush?
Keywords: zoo
Message-ID: <7087@cadnetix.COM>
Date: 15 Mar 89 15:39:30 GMT
References: <13432@ncoast.ORG> <6584@saturn.ucsc.edu> <854@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> <12059@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <1294@bucket.UUCP>
Sender: news@cadnetix.COM
Reply-To: rusty@cadnetix.COM (Rusty)
Organization: Cadnetix Corp.,  Boulder, CO
Lines: 52

In article <1294@bucket.UUCP> leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) writes:
>PKZIP isn't in the running. The *only* alternatives are to keep using
>the old version of ARC that Rahul has on his *nix box, or switch to
>zoo. No others need apply.
>
It is for this reason that I have sent a "lets wait" vote off.  I have looked at
the docs for the structure of the zip archives, and they are *designed* to allow
archive files to cross floppy boundaries.  In fact, they are designed to allow
any ***FILE*** in an archive to cross floppy boundaries!  I have been working on
a 'nifty-keen multi-floppy backup program', (very slowly, I ran into some snags,
an case anyone remembers last year when I was working on it.... sorry for the long
delay) and now that I see the underlying structure of zip, I'm waiting a bit
longer to fight those problems I've been dealing with.  

So, rather than switch **NOW**, I suggest that we wait a bit and see what happens
with zip.  Sure, the code for zip will most likely not be released.  However, docs
are included in the distribution (I've got it at home, and am considering posting 
it, but it is HUGE (50k, I think, I'll have to look)), and I fully expect someone
who knows something about compression to be able to figure out the algorithm and
write some code which will be released for those who want to decode on *nix 
machines.  Then, you'll have everything - multiple floppy backup, *nix execution,
subdirectory traversal, small archives.  Oh, and zip will automatically skip the
self-extracting code of a self-extracting executable so you can get a table of
contents list of a self-extracting archive (or, at least, thats what I understood
the doc to say).

Now, for the disclaimers:

    I think we have an excellent moderator.  The issue of which archiver
to use should ***not*** be taken to mean anyone thinks that he is somehow not
doing a good job.  And zoo is a great program, I have used it at home (but have
had to convert the few files I had zoo'd (?) back to pk(x)arc since a file 
maintenance program I am trying out knows the pk(x)arc format only).

While I realize that switching to zoo would make his job easier, it seems to me
that switching now is not a good idea at this point in time.  We don't have 
enough info yet on the 'new zip'. Maybe in a month or 10 we will have something
to look at and make a reasonable decision about.  Switching now would mean that,
once real info is available, we will either have to not switch to a superior
system (assuming that zip reaches its potential :-), or we will switch and make
everybody convert all their archives to ***yet another*** format!

What do the archive sites have to say about the issue?  They would be involved
in converting to the new format, maybe even twice.  The feelings of the people
involved in maintaining the archives should carry more weight than any single
net-resident, it seems to me.

'nuf said for now.  I'll go back into the woodwork :-).
-----
Rusty Carruth  UUCP:{uunet,boulder}!cadnetix!rusty  DOMAIN: rusty@cadnetix.com
Cadnetix Corp. (303) 444-8075x241 \  5775 Flatiron Pkwy. \ Boulder, Co 80301
Radio: N7IKQ    'home': P.O.B. 461 \  Lafayette, CO 80026