Mail Archives: opendos/1997/04/04/19:14:13
On Fri, 4 Apr 1997, Jonathan E. Brickman wrote:
> > I have yet to see any major software, commercial or otherwise, or
> > even any shareware software, freeware or public domain software
> > released using TGZ in DOS.
>
> There is a standard GNU edition of both gzip and tar for DOS.
Being a Linux user - I have both installed in DOS (and most other
GNU stuff for DOS). However, most other people DON'T have TGZ
allready, and it would be one more program to
download/install/learn how to use, when there is allready an
excepted standard for DOS - ZIP. Although it doesn't come WITH
DOS, you'd be hard pressed to find a computer without it.
> > I'm sure that somewhere out there is
> > an example program that exists for the sole purpose of proving me
> > wrong, however it fails miserably at doing so because this is the
> > real world and we know that NO-ONE distributes programs for DOS
> > using TGZ. No sane person anyway. Besides when is the last time
> > you saw a DOS filename with two dots ('.') in the filename? :o)
>
> Agreed. .tgz / .tar.gz is not really a very processor-efficient
> format.
Well, I'm glad that you agreed with me, the latter statement is
not in tune with what I was trying to say. TGZ *IS* a good
archive format. When I compare ZIP to TGZ in Linux, I find that
TGZ comes out smaller all of the time. I don't know about the
speed, but the archives are usually smaller. Nonetheless, TGZ
belongs in UNIX, and ZIP in DOS. I like it that way too because
when I find a program on the net, I know whether or not it is for
DOS or Linux usually.
Mike A. Harris | http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris
Computer Consultant | Coming soon: dynamic-IP-freedom...
My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html
mailto:mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca
DJGPP: Current version 2.01
- Raw text -