Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!ut-sally!husc6!cca!mirror!jvc
From: jvc@mirror.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: SQUASHED!
Message-ID: <206900056@mirror>
Date: Mon, 13-Jul-87 08:32:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: mirror.206900056
Posted: Mon Jul 13 08:32:00 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 14-Jul-87 06:34:38 EDT
References: <10710@clyde.ATT.COM>
Lines: 26
Nf-ID: #R:clyde.ATT.COM:10710:mirror:206900056:000:1115
Nf-From: mirror.UUCP!jvc    Jul 13 08:32:00 1987


>In article <206900054@mirror> jvc@mirror.UUCP writes:
>:Why would you want to decode MS/PC-DOS *binaries* on a non-MS/PC-DOS
>:machine???
>
>Because .ARC files contain more than binaries, for openers.  With
>executables, I often wish to look at them on the Xenix system for
>Trojan Horses, Copyright notices, etc.
>...

Like what?  The archived binaries in the comp.binaries.ibm.pc will
contain DOC files and maybe some text data files but this would be
of no use unless you could run the programs (which means you need
MS/PC-DOS whether or not MS-DOS is run as a process under Unix or not).
If you can run the binaries, then you can run PKARC to unpack them.
 
As for using Xenix system to look for Trojan Hourses, Copyright
notices, etc, you can do that after you've unpacked it using
MS/PC-DOS (if you can run it, then there's no need to check such things).
Why would it be necessary to do the unpacking on a UNIX machine to reach
this goal?

jvc@mirror
Are the people resisting PKARC the same ones who resisted ARC when it
first came out (because it was a change) but now are happy with ARC?