Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!ut-sally!utah-cs!atwell
From: atwell@utah-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: ARC vs SHAR
Message-ID: <4319@utah-cs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Feb-87 01:13:17 EST
Article-I.D.: utah-cs.4319
Posted: Mon Feb 23 01:13:17 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 24-Feb-87 02:27:57 EST
References: <799@water.UUCP>
Reply-To: atwell@utah-cs.UUCP (Bart L. Atwell)
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
Lines: 14

In article <799@water.UUCP> ljdickey@water.UUCP writes:
>
>Just on the surface, it looks like "uuencode" and "arc" are more useful
>than "shar".  I would like to hear a defense of "shar".
>

There is a lot of C code that is available in net.sources and mod.sources that
uses shar.  If someone wants to port the code to the ST, it is REALLY nice to
be able to download the shar archive in one big hunk then unshar it.

That's why I like shar on the ST: it beats downloading a whole bunch of files.
(Or is there a better way I don't know about?)

Bart