My test with OS X's built-in .zip archiving with OS 9 apps showed the resource fork was not preserved. At least, an app archived that way could not be successfully sent through email or ftp.
Also (and I mentioned this in my original note) when I .zip the Windows build and then unzip on Windows I get "extra stuff" - a folder called _MACOSX. Where is that coming froom? doug On 2/15/04 9:37 AM, "Thomas McGrath III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OSX has builtin zip. It is under the actions button labeled "Create > Archive of..." > > OSX will also unzip via "BOMArchiveHelper" which is built in as well. > > Of course it is best if zip files are created on the Mac since Windows > zip files are not always predictable in preserving the resource fork. > But OSX zip will do the job. > > Stuffit will unzip as well. > > Tom > > On Feb 14, 2004, at 7:25 PM, Ian Wood wrote: > >> >> On 14 Feb 2004, at 23:49, Thomas McGrath III wrote: >> >>> sit, zip and dmg all work well via email/http etc. >>> >> >> <snip> >> >> Are you sure about zip? My experience is that applications never work >> on Mac 9 or X after being zipped, as it doesn't preserve the resource >> fork. I find sit & dmg to be safer for apps. >> >> Ian Wood >> >> _______________________________________________ >> use-revolution mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution >> >> > > Thomas J. McGrath III > SCS > 1000 Killarney Dr. > Pittsburgh, PA 15234 > 412-885-8541 > > _______________________________________________ > use-revolution mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
