home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
- Path: sparky!uunet!news.claremont.edu!jarthur.claremont.edu!jwinstea
- From: jwinstea@jarthur.claremont.edu (Jim Winstead Jr.)
- Subject: Re: Why ZIP/UNZIP slower than DOS version?
- Message-ID: <1992Jul31.061328.3041@muddcs.claremont.edu>
- Sender: news@muddcs.claremont.edu (The News System)
- Organization: Harvey Mudd College, WIBSTR
- References: <1992Jul31.050921.19572@athena.mit.edu>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 06:13:28 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <1992Jul31.050921.19572@athena.mit.edu> chchen@stat.fsu.edu writes:
- >I am using the zip/unzip binaries from tsx-11(or banjo?). The zipping
- >/unzipping speed is far slower than the pkzip/pkunzip DOS version,
- >especially for large files (>= 100k). Anyone has the same problem?
-
- PKzip and PKunzip are highly optimized, primarily by coding the
- critical routines in assembly, according to PKware.
-
- On the other hand, the Info-ZIP zip and unzip sources are entirely in
- C, and designed to be highly portable among platforms - that means a
- loss of speed.
-
- For what it's worth, I haven't really noticed the difference, but I
- don't use zipping programs for speed - I use them to save space.
-
- Also, it's orth mentioning that pkzip/unzip are running under a
- signle-tasking program launcher, not a multitasking, multiuser
- operating ssytem like Linux. There is some overhead involved,
- especially if you are working in other virtual terminals as zip and
- unzip are working.
- --
- + Jim Winstead Jr. (CSci '95)
- | Harvey Mudd College
- | jwinstea@jarthur.Claremont.EDU
- + This is all my words. Honest!
-