Beyond shar (Re: shars and security concerns.)

[Peter da Silva]

In article <682 at n4hgf.uucp> wht at n4hgf.UUCP (Warren Tucker) writes:
> If your machine can't handle the shar format, nothing I put in them will
> do more than make your compiler will vomit or your command line interpreter
> say "NO SUCH COMMAND: MAKE".

-h- article Sat May  5 18:40:07 CDT 1990 .article
I hate to disabuse someone so obviously sure of themselves, but getting a
decent personal computer like (say, just for the sake of argument) an Amiga
to eat the stuff in a typical UNIX program is pretty much a snap. There's
a freely-redistributable bourne shell clone for the Amiga... but, alas, it
lacks here documents. Anything in a typical Makefile, though, is just grist
for the mill.

At worst, you'd have to modify ${CC} and ${CFLAGS}, and maybe ${LIBS}.

Sure, we can unpack shars with unshar programs, but as shars get more and
more out of hand it gets more and more of a pain to keep mangling things.

Why not just switch to something that was (once upon a time, anyway) common,
real simple, and documented in any competant programmer's library (anyone who
doesn't have "Software Tools" needs to get it, IMHO). The Software Tools
archive format.
-t-
-- 
`-_-' Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180.      <peter at ficc.uu.net>
 'U`  Have you hugged your wolf today?  <peter at sugar.hackercorp.com>
@FIN  Commercial solicitation *is* accepted by email to this address.