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?