From:	"Weiqi Gao" <weiqigao AT crl DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Why not to use 'tar' before packing DJGPP?
Date:	9 Nov 1996 20:24:40 GMT
Organization:	CRL Dialup Internet Access
Lines:	43
Message-ID:	<01bbce7c$30fbde60$010200c0@weiqigao>
References:	<32823D97 DOT 44DD AT sabat DOT tu DOT kielce DOT pl> <3282A82E DOT 7EE7 AT cs DOT com> <55vapk$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>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	crl7.crl.com
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

George Foot <mert0407 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk> wrote in article
<561pv7$36c AT news DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk>...
> Robert Babcock (babcock AT shell1 DOT cybercom DOT net) wrote:
> : mert0407 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk (George Foot) writes:
> 
> : >If the proposition is to tar the source, then zip it up, why not tar
it, 
> : >then zip it along with untar.exe (or whatever) and instructions?
> 
> : If the goal is to shrink the distribution files without requiring the
> : use of a utility which may not be easily available to DOS users, you
> : could first make uncompressed ZIP files, then compress those.
> 
> Sorry, I don't really understand tar (yes, I'm a Dos user...), but I 
> thought the point of the original article was that tar could achieve 
> better compression ratios than zip? The quoted figures certainly looked 
> impressive...
> 
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
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."

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.

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.

-- 
Weiqi Gao
weiqigao AT crl DOT com

- Raw text -