home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.misc
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!torn!nott!emr1!jagrant
- From: jagrant@emr1.emr.ca (John Grant)
- Subject: Re: Windows 3.1 LZEXPAND DLL
- Message-ID: <1993Jan8.003723.10831@emr1.emr.ca>
- Organization: Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa
- References: <1993Jan5.224307.11862@mksol.dseg.ti.com> <1993Jan07.185848.23956@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 00:37:23 GMT
- Lines: 28
-
- In article <1993Jan07.185848.23956@microsoft.com> dwightm@microsoft.com (Dwight Matheny) writes:
- >COMPRESS.EXE comes in the Win 3.1 SDK, and MS does not provide this
- >separately. Since you get your tools from Borland, you should be able
- >to get this from Borland also. Borland is part of our Open Tools program,
- >and COMPRESS.EXE is one of the files that they have a license to
- >redistribute.
- >
- >-Dwight (MS)
-
- Yes, it does come with Borland C++.
-
- However, the bad news is that it would appear to be
- not compatible with the version of compress on Unix
- systems. I compressed an ASCII file with both the
- MS compress and the Unix compress and while the compression
- amounts were similar, the contents of the files were not
- even close. I dumped the Unix-compressed file and most of
- it was unreadable binary stuff. On the other hand, the
- MS-compressed file was partially readable.
-
- So what gives here? Is it the same algorithm or not? Are
- they compatible or not? Why not!!!!!!!!!! Shouldn't
- MS's compress.exe be renamed to mscomp.exe so it
- won't get confused with the 'real' compress utility?
- --
- John A. Grant jagrant@emr1.emr.ca
- Airborne Geophysics
- Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa
-