🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <34894@grapevine.uucp> koreth@panarthea.ebay.sun.com (Steven Grimm) writes:
>>On a (sort of) related subject, does anybody else find the shar'ed source
>>code in comp.sources.atari.st to be a constant source of trouble? 
>>UUDecoding a .ZOO file
>>is *so* much simpler.
>
>When I started moderating comp.sources.atari.st, I put all the sources in
>uuencoded arcfiles (check the early volume 1 entries on panarthea).  I got
>about twenty complaints from people at various sites, demanding that I
>use shar instead for various reasons.  Since that seemed to be what the
>public wanted, I switched over.  Frankly, shar is often more of a pain for
>me, too, as (posting rules notwithstanding) sources are frequently sent to
>me as arc or zoo files, which I have to repack as sharfiles.  (Such sources
>tend to sit in my queue for a while.)
>
>What do people think?  Should I switch back to uue'd sources?

I'd much rather have a UUD encoded .arc or .zoo file.  They're much
easier to decode, and I can do the decoding reliably on my ST, whereas
I generally decode shar files on a Unix machine.  Also, I am another
person that goes through the nuisance of pulling the sources off
comp.sources.atari.st, the binaries off of comp.binaries.atari.st,
decodes them both, and finally combines the result into a single .arc
or .zoo file.  It would be nice if this process could be streamlined.
==================================================
| Michael Fischer                                |
|    Arpanet:    <fischer-michael@cs.yale.edu>   |
|    Bitnet:     <fischer-michael@yalecs.bitnet> |
|    UUCP:       <fischer-michael@yale.UUCP>     |
==================================================