Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu From: daveh@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Dave Huang) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: GIF pics at apple2.archive.umich.edu Message-ID: <48958@ut-emx.uucp> Date: 14 May 91 00:23:53 GMT References: <9105111730.AA08829@apple.com> <1991May12.190918.6252@nevada.edu> <1991May13.202755.18108@world.std.com> Sender: news@ut-emx.uucp Reply-To: daveh@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Dave Huang) Organization: The University of Texas at Austin Lines: 22 In article <1991May13.202755.18108@world.std.com> lucifer@world.std.com (Kevin S Green) writes: >Now that's an excellent idea! There are many implementations of >uuencode around including source code for some. Some of these >implementations are extremely robust. Once I've finished teaching >myself C, I plan to try my hand at writing a uuencode utility so >I cast my vote that we move to uuencode. Personally, I don't like uuencode. I haven't seen all of the implementations, but the ones that I have seen are almost exactly like the "real" Unix one, which isn't that great. Combining multiple part uuencode files is a pain. With BinSCII, you can just stick them together and everything works fine. With uuencode, you have to delete all header and trailer lines, then stick the files together. Also, uuencode doesn't have any checksums, unlike BinSCII. >-- >Kevin S. Green / lucifer@world.std.com / {xylogics;uunet}!world!lucifer -- David Huang | Internet: daveh@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu | "Help! My ganglion is UUCP: ...!ut-emx!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu!daveh | stuck in some chewing gum!" America Online: DrWho29 |