Mail Archives: djgpp/1994/05/23/14:44:50
> I don't think we should use arj for any distributions for the following
> reasons:
> 1) it is sharefree, not freeware
There is a freely distributable unarj.c with minimal features.
> 2) it doesn't seem to work right
Examples? Or are you just referring to the way it handles paths? I use ARJ
from time to time, so I'd like to know if it is broken. My impression has
been that Robert Jung does much a much better job of beta testing and fixing
bugs than other shareware archiver authors.
> and does the typical wierd dos things with pathnames
Well, it is a DOS program...
- Raw text -