Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!rochester!udel!wack
From: wack@udel.EDU (Andrew Wack)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re:  Possible Executioner replacement...
Message-ID: <2811@louie.udel.EDU>
Date: 1 Jun 88 02:10:48 GMT
References: <8805311708.aa19483@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA>
Sender: usenet@udel.EDU
Reply-To: wack@udel.EDU (Andrew Wack)
Organization: University of Delaware
Lines: 26

In article <8805311708.aa19483@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA> JDA@NIHCU.BITNET (Doug Ashbrook) writes:
>> Yes, one is going to need binscii to un-convert files. Not a real hardship,
>> I'll distribute binscii in executioner format. eventually, it will replace
>> executioner. Those who don't have it could send me mail, and i'll send them a
>> copy.
>
>if I receive a file in
>BINSCII format, I must first have the BINSCII program before I can
>unpack the file.  Maybe once BINSCII becomes as popular as BLU,
>everyone will have a copy of BINSCII and this will be a moot point.
>But until then, it will not be nearly as convenient.  Maybe the

Better yet, how about incorporating the unpacking into blu?  Then 
everything could be done in one step, sort of like the way blu separates
binary II files and automaticaly unsqueezes them if necessary.  I would
find this much more convenient since I usually have to use blu anyway.

This would also be easier for anyone running a "shell" program other than
basic.  For instance, everytime I down load something I have to start up
basic from APW so I can unpack the file.  Being able to do all this with
one program would be great!  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARPA: wack@udel.edu           Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people
                                            falling in love -- Albert Einstein.
-