🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2492@water.waterloo.edu> ljdickey@water.waterloo.edu (Lee Dickey) writes:
>In article <619@chyde.uwasa.fi> hv@chyde.uwasa.fi (Harri Valkama LAKE) writes:
>>I don't know how widely ZOO is used in Atari ST world but I
>>think that we should consider to change our "manners" in such
>>a way that comp.binaries.atari.st could use ONLY ZOO as the
>>one and only archiving pgm instead of ARC.
>
>On the plus side, I think that the big advantage of ZOO is that
>one can store directory path information along with the file.

And this feature is a real time saver both for the submitter and
for the receiver of a software package which is structured in
several (possibly nested) directories. An extreme example is
DVIST with a lot of font directories. In the last distribution
it was still packed with ARC: Each directory is packed as an ARC
file, and nested directories are ARC files contained in other
ARC files. Those of you who have unpacked DVIST know how much
time they needed. Now consider Zoo: You issue *one* command and
Zoo does all that time consuming stuff for you - and of course
much faster.

Surely the above only applies to software packages with a
directory structure. Most software however comes with a few
files on the same directory level. In this case ARC is fully
sufficient and there is no need to change to Zoo. I do not see
any obstacle to use *both* programs. Like ARC Zoo was
distributed on comp.binaries.atari.st and is available in
archives so everyone should already have it for his ST or
should at least be able to get it.

On a related topic: In my (spare) free time I am working on
ARCGSH V2.0. The most important change to the current version
1.4 will be that (in addition to ARC) a user-friendly interface
to Zoo is supported. I am also planning to support archiving and
unarchiving shell archives (SHAR). There are also some minor
changes to improve the usability of the program.

I am thinking about making ARCGSH a shareware program.
Therefore some questions: Would *you* like to use ARCGSH V2.0
or do you think V1.4 is sufficient (if you use it at all)?
Would *you* be willing to pay some $$ for ARCGSH V2.0?

  Rainer Klute           ----    klute@trillian.irb.informatik.uni-dortmund.de
  Univ. Dortmund, IRB    |)|/    klute@unido.uucp, klute@unido.bitnet
  Postfach 500500        |\|\    ...uunet!mcvax!unido!klute
D-4600 Dortmund 50       ----    Tel.: +49 231 7554663