Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!netnews.upenn.edu!cps3xx!usenet
From: usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Archive idea (was Re: Self Extracting Archives)
Message-ID: <6910@cps3xx.UUCP>
Date: 13 Mar 90 20:13:27 GMT
References: <55.25f441b5@uoft02.utoledo.edu> <195@sai.UUCP> <2675@leah.Albany.Edu> <79.25f87ef0@uoft02.utoledo.edu> <10102@cbmvax.commodore.com> <90.25fc5fd6@uoft02.utoledo.edu> <13763@nigel.udel.EDU>
Reply-To: porkka@frith.UUCP (Joe Porkka)
Distribution: na
Organization: Michigan State University
Lines: 25

I just though of a great solution to the archiving problem.

Any archive must maintain the same info as any filesystem right?
Soooo why not make the archive itself a filesystem so that the standard
commands (and workbench) work with it. Instead of having to
type "fooarchiver dsfbkha archivename.foo file1 file2" simply
type "copy myfiles archive:neato all".
Simple enuff?
To get a list of the files, type "dir archive:neato opt a"


Spring break is coming up and I plan to implement this.
The first cut will be making a compress.device that
acts like the trackdisk.device, then I will simply need
to mount any existing filesystem on that. The compress.device
will use a file as its storage mechanism instead of actual
hardware.
Next cut, make a custom filesystem that understands the compress.device
and can make assumptions about its operation to improve efficiency
over a standard filesystem.


So, what do you all think? 

 Joe Porkka   porkka@frith.egr.msu.edu