Mail Archives: djgpp/1996/11/09/12:02:47
Robert Babcock (babcock AT shell1 DOT cybercom DOT net) wrote:
: mert0407 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk (George Foot) writes:
: >If the proposition is to tar the source, then zip it up, why not tar it,
: >then zip it along with untar.exe (or whatever) and instructions?
: If the goal is to shrink the distribution files without requiring the
: use of a utility which may not be easily available to DOS users, you
: could first make uncompressed ZIP files, then compress those.
Sorry, I don't really understand tar (yes, I'm a Dos user...), but I
thought the point of the original article was that tar could achieve
better compression ratios than zip? The quoted figures certainly looked
impressive...
--
George Foot
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ |""""""""""""""""""""""|
>Email: george DOT foot AT merton DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk < |Snail Mail:(*) |
> or: mert0407 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk < | _ George Foot |
> Web: http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mert0407/ < |(@) Merton College |
> Ftp: mc31.merton.ox.ac.uk (#) < |~~~~ Oxford OX1 4JD |
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ |______________________|
(#) Theoretically... || (*) Please allow 28 days for delivery
- Raw text -