home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.sys.next.misc:18618 comp.sys.next.programmer:5576
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.misc,comp.sys.next.programmer
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!madler
- From: madler@cco.caltech.edu (Mark Adler)
- Subject: Re: A NEW tar&compress FRONTEND....
- Message-ID: <1992Aug12.172335.21102@cco.caltech.edu>
- Sender: news@cco.caltech.edu
- Nntp-Posting-Host: bartman
- Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
- References: <92224.140741JTRQC@CUNYVM.BITNET> <1992Aug11.204524.117926@zeus.calpoly.edu>
- Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 17:23:35 GMT
- Lines: 26
-
-
- Mark Neidengard suggests:
-
- >> the world) but you might wanna check out the new versions of the Unix zip
- >> and unzip (1.80g and 5.0m, respectively) which support the deflate algorithm.
-
- Patience, patience. Those are beta versions. The final release versions
- will be out in a week or so. When they are ready, I will put them on the
- usual NeXT sites, along with compiled versions for our cc'less compatriots.
-
- >> These programs are THE tightest unix compression available....MUCH more so
- >> than the Unix compress.
-
- Yes, zip is rather a lot better than Unix compress. However, there are
- better compressors available, if you have lots of memory and are willing
- to wait. Zip has the advantage of running with speeds comprable to
- compress. Programs like Squash and comp-2 will (almost always) compress
- better than zip, and run much much slower. They also decompress in
- about the same time they take to compress. Unzip decompresses quite a
- bit faster than zip compresses.
-
- I use Squash for long-term archiving, but I use zip for moving stuff
- across machines (or even continents).
-
- Mark Adler
- madler@tybalt.caltech.edu
-