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. -