[netatalk-admins] FAT and 68k

Subject: [netatalk-admins] FAT and 68k
From: Yannai A. Gonczarowski (yannaigo@leyada.jlm.k12.il)
Date: Sat Jul 19 1997 - 04:46:35 EDT

• Next message: Peter Gutowski: "Re: [netatalk-admins] FAT and 68k"
• Previous message: Os Tyler: "[netatalk-admins] progress, but afpd does not start"
• Next in thread: Peter Gutowski: "Re: [netatalk-admins] FAT and 68k"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Can anyone tell me what's the difference between a 68k binary and a FAT
binary, and if my MAC runs them both, which should I use? (I have
noticed that 68k binaries often take less disk space, but leave that
aside, are there any performance differences?)

Thanks,
Bye,
Yannai.

--
Yannai A. Gonczarowski     System Administrator    
yannaigo@leyada.jlm.k12.il
The Hebrew University High School     
http://www.leyada.jlm.k12.il/~yannaigo/
"Do you want to know something? Everybody's human."
"I find that remark insulting."
  - Kirk and Spock, "Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered contry", stardate
9529.1

• Next message: Peter Gutowski: "Re: [netatalk-admins] FAT and 68k"
• Previous message: Os Tyler: "[netatalk-admins] progress, but afpd does not start"
• Next in thread: Peter Gutowski: "Re: [netatalk-admins] FAT and 68k"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Dec 18 1999 - 16:25:42 EST