Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!hybrid!chance!john
From: john@chance.UUCP (John R. MacMillan)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: An idea for safer and portable unshar-ing
Message-ID: <1989Oct3.225620.17825@chance.UUCP>
Date: 3 Oct 89 22:56:20 GMT
References: <1989Sep30.171114.12550@chance.UUCP> <8910020054.AA08811@cscwam.UMD.EDU> <2270@munnari.oz.au>
Reply-To: john@chance.UUCP (John R. MacMillan)
Organization: Haphazard
Lines: 18

In article <2270@munnari.oz.au> ok@cs.mu.oz.au (Richard O'Keefe) writes:
|In article <8910020054.AA08811@cscwam.UMD.EDU>, djm@wam.UMD.EDU writes:
|> This suggestion seems to be moving in the direction of making archives
|> that plain old /bin/sh can't unpack at all.  Perhaps it's not a bad
|> idea.
|
|Let's not forget why we use sharchives in the first place.
|The point was to have a format for distributing sources which could
|be used by people who HAVEN'T got any specialised "unshar".

That's why I suggested what I did; it still works for everyone who's
happy with shar format, and it makes it easier on people without
/bin/sh or who don't trust running /bin/sh on someone elses shars.
(I'm neither, by the way).
-- 
John R. MacMillan           "Don't you miss it...don't you miss it...
john@chance.UUCP             Some of you people just about missed it."
...!utcsri!hcr!chance!john        -- Talking Heads