Message-ID: <32866410.3C30@ananke.amu.edu.pl>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 00:24:00 +0100
From: Mark Habersack <grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
Reply-To: grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl
Organization: Home, sweet home
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Weiqi Gao <weiqigao AT crl DOT com>
CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Why not to use 'tar' before packing DJGPP?
References: <32823D97 DOT 44DD AT sabat DOT tu DOT kielce DOT pl> <3282A82E DOT 7EE7 AT cs DOT com> <55vapk$s4l AT news DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk> <babcock DOT 847510845 AT cybercom DOT net> <561pv7$36c AT news DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk> <01bbce7c$30fbde60$010200c0 AT weiqigao>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Weiqi Gao wrote:

> Isn't it true that tar cannot do any compression at all, and the
> compression is all done by gzip after an tar file is created (I might be
yes, you're right. TAR is not a compression utility.

> wrong here)?  So the question should rightly be "why are we using PKZIP
> instead of gzip?"
> 
> The answer to that question probably is "PKZIP is a better program than
> gzip."
I'd argue here. I think GZIP is better. It is probably more difficult to
use than PKZIP, but if you know what you're doing you'll get much better
results than with PKZIP. I think we again bump against the "user
friendliness" here.

> As to claims made in earlier articles in this thread that PKZIP is easier
> to learn than tar, I must disagree.  I must also disagree that PKZIP is
> more readily available than tar.
> 
> I know at least five operating systems that included a tar command in its
> standard configuration.  I know of NO operating systems that included a
> PKZIP command.  I don't know how much your copy of PKZIP costed you, but
> mine was $49.00.  tar is free as far as I know.
Remember that we're talking about DOS all the time. 90% of people using
DJGPP, have only DOS/Windows on their computers, and in DOS tar is not
at all popular nor standard. Anyone who haven't had any contact with
Unix systems, doesn't even know the name 'tar'. As to price. I don't
know how much it costs, because I use Info-Zip's ZIP which is also free.

> Ease of learning is, in my opinion, not an issue here, because both can be
> done within a few days or two.  But if you really want to judge PKZIP and
> tar on that ground, I'd say PKZIP is harder to learn because it has a
> longer manual.  Simply reading the whole thing takes longer.
Sorry, I don't want to seem hoity-toity here, but I've never read PKZIP
(nor ARJ, RAR or whatever) manual. I think it's enough to type
'something -?|-H' and read what switches does it take. Besides PKZIP has
been on the market for such a long time that it's syntax is probably as
obvious as that of 'cd' command.

-- 
===========================================================
October. And the trees are stripped bare of all they wear.
What do I care? October.
And Kingdoms rise, And Kingdoms fall,
But you go on, and on.
===========================================================