Hi,
 HM> In the above example, JAR without the "mn" switch had the least
 HM> compression. However, at other times I've noticed that it would
 HM> actually rank _between_ "m1" and "m2".  Strange :-)
       Maybe the different archive sizes depend on the available memory to
JAR since I think the compression is affected by the memory used by JAR. I
could be mistaken but that's what I think.
[)(]::::::::::::::::::::  Jesse@BnInter.org  ::::::::::::::::::::[)(]  :)
--- GEcho/386/JAM/V.34+
---------------