home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: soap.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet
- From: m.hendry@dial.pipex.com (Mathew Hendry)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
- Subject: Re: Best Cruncher?
- Date: Wed, 13 Mar 96 01:51:34
- Organization: Private node.
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <19960313.45B8C8.20CB@am059.du.pipex.com>
- References: <19960312.500360.6425@an081.du.pipex.com> <151D9C41@cu-amiga.demon.co.uk>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: am059.du.pipex.com
- X-Newsreader: TIN [AMIGA 1.3 950726BETA PL0]
-
- Mat Bettinson (mat@cu-amiga.demon.co.uk) wrote:
- : Salutations Mathew for on the 12 Mar 96, verilly did you scribe;
- : MH> transparent than compressing files individually. It also may save you
- : MH> more space, since it can compress data files as well as executables, in
- : MH> each case using an XPK compression method tailored to the file in
- : MH> question (e.g. SQSH for music modules, FAST or no compression for
- : MH> frequently accessed files, CRM2 or SHRI for seldom accessed files,
- : MH> etc.)
- :
- : What happened to RAKE? RAKE, SQSH and FAST on 0% mode are the only three
- : useful libraries IMHO.
-
- Just examples.
-
- I use SHRI on large files which I access very infrequently (typically lha -z'ed
- archives which are offloaded to floppy). CRM2 is useful for files which are
- to remain online but not be accessed very frequently - on some types of data
- it performs significantly better than SQSH. RAKE and FAST are indeed fast, but
- if you're not going to be accessing some files very often, you'd be better
- packing them with a more effective compressor.
-
- -- Mat.
-