[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why BinSCII?
- Subject: Re: Why BinSCII?
- From: khym@bga.com (Khym Mahn)
- Date: 12 May 1994 00:47:19 -0500
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
- Organization: Real/Time Communications - Bob Gustwick and Associates
- References: <Xaw1Lc2w165w@cybernet.cse.fau.edu> <tolsenCpIAJs.LrK@netcom.com> <mnementhCpnrGn.8J7@netcom.com>
In article <mnementhCpnrGn.8J7@netcom.com>,
David R. Villegas <mnementh@netcom.com> wrote:
>Since most of the binaries posts are Shrinkit archives, is there an advantage
>to using binscii rather than uuencode? Considering that a good number of
Yes, uuencode sucks big time :-) You have to cut headers, make sure
the pieces are in the right order, and all that stuff. Yes, I know
there are utilities that automate that, but like sciibin, you'll
probably have to compile them :) The Binscii format is more robust
than uuencode.
--
Name: Dave Huang | Mammal, mammal / their names are called /
INet: khym@bga.com | they raise a paw / the bat, the cat /
ICBM: 30d 27' 36"N 97d 59' 17"W | dolphin and dog / koala bear and hog -- TMBG