X-no-Archive:yes
You are correct about the tar z stuff, of course.    But consider this, we
use WINZIP so that we can add readme files and other stuff along with the
tar file.  Then again, using WINZIP and provided that you have  the .tar
extension on the file, you can open the tar file and look at the contents
on the PC.  You can even look at the contents of an ASCII file in the tar
file.  Pretty neat stuff.

But certainly, one could skip the WINZIP thing.

Kind regards,

Denys. . .

Denys Beauchemin
HICOMP America, Inc.
(800) 323-8863  (281) 288-7438         Fax: (281) 355-6879
denys at hicomp.com                             www.hicomp.com



-----Original Message-----
From:   Stan Sieler [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   Wednesday, 14 April, 1999 11:47 AM
To:     [log in to unmask]
Cc:     [log in to unmask]
Subject:        Re: [HP3000-L] UNPACKP Problem - go Native

Re: UNPACKP / LZW / STORE / tar

I'll still vote for LZW, until TurboSTORE is enhanced.

TurboSTORE/diskfile method is sensitive to the format in which the
file is uploaded to the HP 3000.  A real problem for files transferred
over the network.  Requires care in uploading to the 3000.

LZW is extremely forgiving about the format of the uploaded file.

> Actually, I would vote for tar.  We distribute our MPE software in that
> format, and using WINZIP we can compress the file and send it over the

WINZIP? Heck...compress it with "compress" in the POSIX shell, or do it
with tar's "z" option ... why require the use of a program *and step* on
another platform?

SS