Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!bfmny0!tneff
From: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff)
Newsgroups: alt.sources.d
Subject: Re: shars and security concerns.
Message-ID: <15437@bfmny0.UU.NET>
Date: 1 May 90 08:30:39 GMT
References: <662@n4hgf.uucp> <1152@chinacat.Unicom.COM> <518@cpsolv.CPS.COM> <1203@chinacat.Unicom.COM>
Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff)
Lines: 13

In article <1203@chinacat.Unicom.COM> chip@chinacat.Unicom.COM (Chip Rosenthal) writes:
>TODAY'S HELPFUL HINT:  If you need to do something special with the setup
>or installation of your software distribution (e.g. chmod, uudecode,
>etc.), please provide a ten-line sh script in the archive rather than
>making it part of the shar archive itself.

I agree except that 'chmod +x' ought to be allowed.  It's common already,
and basic to making scripts executable.  That exact syntax could be
standardized for simulation elsewhere.

>Not rhetorical: would shar format be an appropriate topic for an RFC?

I think so.  Someone 'major' would have to do it.