CompuServe Thread

#New (?) Zoo

10 messages in this thread
#80163From: Bob ChapmanDec 3, 1992 10:43 PM
Does any one know the background of the 'new' Zoo v2.10 in Lib 16: > ZOO.LHA 16 282K 29-Nov-92 Zoo v2.10, a new version (sic) It is said to be a port by Olaf Seibert (although that was not readily apparent in my first look through the archive). Previous ports were done by J. Brian Waters with the most recent version seen here: > AmigaZoo 2.1 Beta 3 (J. Brian Waters 91/08/01) Alas, while this 'new' Zoo v2.1 seems to have fixed the piping problem of AmigaZoo 2.1 Beta 3 (i.e. for the l, V, ep, … options), it appears to have acquired a leap year (or leap day anyway) problem. Consider the file: > foo.bar 4 —-rwed 29-Feb-92 00:00:02 When archived (zoo a FOO foo.bar) we find the archive has a strange date: > FOO.zoo 173 —-rwed 31-Dec-79 00:00:02 Internal to the archive foo.bar's date seems fine: Archive FOO.zoo: Length CF Size Now Date Time ——– — ——– ——— ——– 4 0% 4 29 Feb 92 00:00:02 foo.bar ——– — ——– ——— ——– 4 0% 4 1 file But, if we use the 'new' Zoo to extract (zoo x FOO) we see OK NOT! > foo.bar 4 —-rwed 31-Dec-79 00:00:02 However, if we use the J. Brian Waters AmigaZoo v2.1 for the extract, foo.bar is restored with the correct (original) date time stamp — Even though FOO.zoo has the screwy date time stamp. Go figure! BTW, MANY THANKS Michael for taking the time to list the new Uploads!! REC ——
#80174From: Michael GerardDec 3, 1992 11:56 PM
Bob: Glad you like the monthly uploads list. I can't answer your questions regarding the ZOO 2.1 upload as I didn't upload it or review it for the libs… maybe someone else has some more information.
#80254From: Betty Clay/SYSOPDec 4, 1992 7:19 PM
I can only tell you that the new ZOO came from the latest batch of Fish disks. —Betty
#80288From: Bob ChapmanDec 4, 1992 9:00 PM
Betty – Even though I'm a registered and frequent user of Stefan Boberg's most excellent and state-of-the-art LhA, I continue to prefer and use Zoo for some of my archives because IMO the notes capability is better, I find the versions capability to be very useful, and (perhaps) I have a warped mind 🙂 As you may remember, the 'leap year' problem has affected a number of popular utilities (and astute authors). If I remember correctly, AmigaZoo v2.0x had a go-round with this back in 1988 (<– ancient times wot!). Since source is included in the archive — if I don't have the ability or initiative to do something about it then I guess whining is out! 🙂 REC ——
#80322From: Betty Clay/SYSOPDec 5, 1992 12:35 AM
Good reply, Bob. I hope the new ZOO will prove helpful. —Betty
#80554From: Dale D. SnellDec 7, 1992 2:37 AM
Bob, If I recall correctly, the leap-year bug was in Rahul Dhesi's original code. I *thought* that he had fixed that, maybe not. If Olaf didn't know about it, he could have ported the code over without noticing it. –dds (…on AutoPilot)
#80652From: Bob ChapmanDec 7, 1992 9:38 PM
Dale – > If I recall correctly, the leap-year bug was . . . Perhaps you're right — but I don't remember Zoo on other platforms being affected at that time (course I coulda become aware after they had already been corrected) and I do sorta remember a quick release of AmigaZoo to correct it. In addition, the error seems somewhat different from what I vaguely remember of the earlier one. The earlier one affected most (if not all dates after/before (?) the magic time whereas this one appears to be specific to 'leap day' (ie. 29-Feb-92) itself. However, I sure wouldn't dispute you too strongly because the whole thing is really leaping out into the 'Twilight Zone' of this old codger's memory. 🙂 REC ——
#81340From: Dale D. SnellDec 13, 1992 9:26 PM
Bob, I know that the leap-year bug affected the Un*x version of Zoo — I remember all the yammering over it. (Ah, Usenet… *g*) –dds (…on AutoPilot)
#80564From: Pete MilesDec 7, 1992 9:46 AM
Bob, Zoo v2.10 is on Fish753 Pete from Dorset in Englands West Country – via Whap!
#80653From: Bob ChapmanDec 7, 1992 9:38 PM
Pete – Thanks for the info REC ——