Building app distributions - some best practices?

[Doug Lerner]

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" <3mcgrath at adelphia.net> 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
>> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
>> 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
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution