🚀 go-pugleaf

+---------------
| In article <932@tekig4.UUCP> bradn@tekig4.UUCP (Bradford Needham) writes:
| Please don't post stuff in packitIII format.  The existing BinHex protocol
| is sufficient for sending Mac binaries.
| 
| BinHex is free and has become the de facto standard for encoding Mac binary
| files.  Packit, on the other hand, is $15 shareware and is used by only a
| handful of people on the net.
+---------------

PackitI is also free. PackitII IS shareware and PackitIII is also shareware.
However, UNPACKING packit I, II and III* files is also free
because of three programs available free. These are unix unpit and the
mac implementation of it, distributed in net.sources.mac, and a program called
unpacker, for the mac, which can unpack but not pack packit files. It appears
to me that unpacker was distributed by Harry Chesley.

* Note:
Unpacking PackitIII files follows the same rules, since the difference
between Packit III and Packit II is an encryption option. Anyone who
posted an encrypted file for public consumption would be rather stupid.
The compression scheme is the same on Packit III as it was on Packit II.
+---------------
| The Packit use discussion appeared once before, when version II of packit
| appeared on the net.  From the small number of PackitII postings since then
| it seems that net folks have agreed that BinHex encoding is the only way to go.
+---------------

So the arguements concerning the shareware status of Packit don't effect the
use of it on the network. Now whether it serves any true need is another
issue entirely.
-- 
 Jim Budler
 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
 (408) 749-5806
 Usenet: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra,intelca}!amdcad!jimb
 Compuserve:	72415,1200

I got tired of my old signature.