L.D.
I have UU en/de program by Richard Marks and it will decode an encoded
document contained within another document without having to strip the other
material. UU is freeware. Registration gets you the added benefit of
BASE64. I also have another UU program, but you have to strip the extraneous
material before it will decode the file.
Your evaluation of MIME/BASE64 is considerably different than Richard Marks.
One of the criticisms that he has of MIME/BASE64 is that there is no length
checking to make sure that the entire file has been sent. He also has some
scathing criticism of AOL's implementation.
Roger Turk
Tucson, Arizona USA
L.D. wrote:
>>Uh guys ..
Any binary file attached to e-mail *must* be encoded -- either MIME or
UU. That includes zip files.
You've apparently found the problem, but it's not what you think it is.
<G>
The problem is that Arachne has, for some reason in ver 1.66, stopped
automatically decoding certain attached files. I rather routinely
receive MIME encoded attachments, and have never had a problem with
Arachne automatically decoding them.
Yet another reason not to "move up" to ver 1.66
Although the files which come with Arachne are *named* uuencode.exe &
uudecode.exe, they are not anywhere like the "original" UU en/de
programs I have; for one thing they are *much* smaller, and for another
thing they apparently can en/decode both UU & MIME. MIME is the better
bet for a couple of reasons -- most browsers are built to decode it
automatically [except, it seems, Arachne v1.66], and the encoded files
are measurably smaller than uuencoded files.
I have *two* MIME en/decoders, but an Arachne user shouldn't *need* them
... except in the 'new disimproved 1.66 version' <G><<
