diff --git a/1992/albert/Makefile b/1992/albert/Makefile
index 1ef61ad36..d1f3f0a41 100644
--- a/1992/albert/Makefile
+++ b/1992/albert/Makefile
@@ -166,8 +166,8 @@ OBJ= ${PROG}.o
 DATA=
 TARGET= ${PROG}
 #
-ALT_OBJ=
-ALT_TARGET=
+ALT_OBJ= ${PROG}.alt.o
+ALT_TARGET= ${PROG}.alt
 
 
 #################
@@ -184,6 +184,9 @@ all: data ${TARGET}
 ${PROG}: ${PROG}.c
 	${CC} ${CFLAGS} $< -o $@ ${LIBS}
 
+${PROG}.alt: ${PROG}.alt.c
+	${CC} ${CFLAGS} $< -o $@ ${LIBS}
+
 # alternative executable
 #
 alt: data ${ALT_TARGET}
diff --git a/1992/albert/README.md b/1992/albert/README.md
index c78f16702..21c817a9e 100644
--- a/1992/albert/README.md
+++ b/1992/albert/README.md
@@ -14,6 +14,38 @@
 
 	./albert 1234567890123456789
 
+### Alternate code
+
+An alternate version of this entry, albert.fix.c, is provided.
+Leo Broukhis, before he was an IOCCC judge, sent the IOCCC
+judges this Email message:
+
+```
+From: leo _at_ zycad -dot- com (Leo Broukhis)
+Date: Tue, 30 Jan 96 17:37:51 PST
+To: judges _at_ toad -dot- com
+Subject: IOCCC 1992 - a bug
+
+Dear Judges,
+
+albert.c (even in its fixed form) still has a bug. Although I don't
+remember the number that exposed the bug (afair, resulting in coredump)
+in albert.orig.c that has been fixed in albert.c,
+
+I've found a number exposing another bug: 10000000001 (that's 9 0's).
+Both albert and albert.orig loop without printing anything, although
+the first factor is 101 and is usually found in an instant.
+```
+
+The `albert.c` file is the fixed file, where as the `albert.alt.c`
+is file before aookying Leo Broukhis' fix.
+
+To compile this alternate version:
+
+    make alt
+
+Use `albert.alt` as you would `albert` above.
+
 ## Judges' comments
     
     We were impressed with the speed at which it was able to factor
diff --git a/1992/albert/albert.alt.c b/1992/albert/albert.alt.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..489f27cdf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/1992/albert/albert.alt.c
@@ -0,0 +1,152 @@
+#include <stdio.h>
+#include <malloc.h>
+#include <setjmp.h>
+#include <ctype.h>
+#define new(PP) (PP *) malloc(sizeof(PP)) 
+typedef struct q {
+    jmp_buf ppp;
+    long qq;
+    struct q *P;
+    struct q *p;
+} 
+PP;
+
+PP *P;
+int aaaaaa=2;
+int aaaaaaa=1;
+
+long qqq;
+
+
+aaAaaa(aa,aaa)
+char *aa;
+char *aaa;
+{
+    char aaaa = 0;
+    if ((((( aaa )))))
+    {
+        aaaa = *aa;
+        *aa=0;
+        aa+=strlen(aa+1);
+        P =new(PP);
+        P->P=P;
+        P->p=P;
+    }
+
+    if ((((( !setjmp(P->ppp) ))))) 
+        {
+        if ((((( !isdigit(*aa) )))))
+            longjmp(P->ppp,aaaaaaa);
+        else {
+            P->p->P = new(PP);
+            P->p->P->P = P;
+            P->p->P->p = P->p;
+            P->p = P->p->P;
+
+            P->qq = *aa--;
+            P = P->p;
+            aaAaaa(aa,0);
+        }
+    } else {
+        if ( !aaaa&&!*aa ) 
+           longjmp(P->p->ppp,aaaaaaa);
+
+        if ((((( (P->qq=aaaa)<10     &&!
+                 (isdigit(aaaa))     ||!
+                 (isdigit(*aa)       ||!
+                 *aa                        )))))) 
+        {
+            fprintf(stderr,"Usage %c%s <number>\n",
+            (aaa[0]?7:aaaa),aaa+!aaa[0]);
+            exit(1);
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+
+ppPppp(pp,ppp)
+PP **pp, *ppp;
+{
+    int aa;
+    if ((((( !(aa=setjmp(ppp->ppp))||aa==aaaaaa )))))
+    {
+        if ((((( *pp==ppp )))))
+        {
+            ppp = (*pp)->p;
+
+            if ( qqq<47 ) return;
+            if ( ppp->qq!=48 ) return;
+
+            while ( ppp->qq==48 ) 
+            {
+                printf("%ld\n",qqq-45);
+                *pp = ppp;
+                ppp = ppp->p;
+            }
+            qqq -= 1;
+            longjmp(ppp->ppp,aaaaaaa);
+        } else {
+            PP *p;
+
+            ppPppp(pp,ppp->p);
+            for (p=ppp;p!=*pp;p=p->p)
+            {
+                int qq=4;
+                if ((((( qqq<47                            &&
+                         (qq=0,p->qq+=p->p->qq-96)>=48-qqq ||
+                         qqq>46                            &&
+                         (p->qq-=p->p->qq)<0                   ))))) 
+                {
+                    p->qq += qqq+qq;
+                    if ( p->p==P && qqq<=46 )
+                    {
+                        P->p->P = new(PP);
+                        P->p->P->P = P;
+                        P->p->P->p = P->p;
+                        *pp = P = P->p = P->p->P;
+                        P->qq = 48;
+                    }
+
+                    p->p->qq+=qq==0;
+                    p->p->qq-=qq!=0;
+                }
+                else
+                {
+                    p->qq += 48;
+                }
+            }
+            if ( ppp->P==P ) longjmp(ppp->ppp,aaaaaaa);
+        }
+    }
+    else
+    {
+        qqq += 1; 
+
+        while (48==P->qq )
+        {
+            P->P->p = P->p;
+            P = P->p->P = P->P;
+
+        }
+
+        if (ppp!=ppp->p->p )
+            longjmp(ppp->ppp,aaaaaa);
+        else
+        {
+            printf("At most one remains\n");
+            exit(0);
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+
+main(aaa,aaaa)
+int aaa;
+char **aaaa;
+{
+    aaAaaa(aaa==aaaaaaa?aaaa[0]:aaaa[1],aaaa[0]);
+    qqq = 39;
+    ppPppp(&P,P->p);
+}
+
+
diff --git a/1992/albert/albert.fix.hint.md b/1992/albert/albert.fix.hint.md
deleted file mode 100644
index 315060ef5..000000000
--- a/1992/albert/albert.fix.hint.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,22 +0,0 @@
-From: leo _at_ zycad -dot- com (Leo Broukhis)
-Date: Tue, 30 Jan 96 17:37:51 PST
-To: judges _at_ toad -dot- com
-Subject: IOCCC 1992 - a bug
-
-Dear Judges,
-
-albert.c (even in its fixed form) still has a bug. Although I don't
-remember the number that exposed the bug (afair, resulting in coredump)
-in albert.orig.c that has been fixed in albert.c,
-I've found a number exposing another bug: 10000000001 (that's 9 0's).
-Both albert and albert.orig loop without printing anything, although
-the first factor is 101 and is usually found in an instant.
-
-Unfortunately, the e-mail address in albert.hint is no longer valid,
-and neither whois, nor replacing old domain name with a new one according
-to the MX records, nor Altavista Web search were successful.
-
-...Fortunately, Albert van der Horst did send me an unobfuscated
-(but somewhat limited - it doesn't check the number for factors 2, 3, 5, 7)
-version of his program. I didn't have a chance to augment its functionality
-to the one of the contest entry.