Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tekcrl!tekgvs!keithe
From: keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: Binaries and which packing (Was Re: xx vs. uu)
Message-ID: <6901@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM>
Date: 20 Feb 90 19:44:34 GMT
References: <8066@lindy.Stanford.EDU> <8386@cg-atla.UUCP>
Reply-To: keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 22

In article <8386@cg-atla.UUCP> fredex@cg-atla.UUCP (Fred Smith) writes:
>
>I hereby vote (for whatever good it does) for using one of the self-
>extracting archiver formats.
>
>Fred Smith
>fredex@cg-atla.agfa.com

Humple Opimiom No. 341-A:

Uh, excuse me, but: Self Extracting on WHAT machine/OS?  I'd guess
the reply would be "IBM-PC's, of course."  What about all dem folks
what wants to look at attum b4 they download from their news host to
their IBM-PC/Clone?  

There are some archivers, I believe, that will allow the "master"
archiving program to manipulate what is also a self extracting
archive; that is the kind that would be required if, in fact, SEX
(Self-EXtracting) archives are used.  (Ain't ZOO one of these? I'm
not sure...mumble, mumble.)

kEITHe