1. Compressing executables.
- Posted by ChrisB (moderator) Nov 19, 2010
- 1346 views
Hi
I see that UPX is already used when binding Windows executables.
I find that gzexe does an excellent and similar job in Linux eg Jetvet down from 4.4 megs to 1.3 megs
Chris
2. Re: Compressing executables.
- Posted by jeremy (admin) Nov 22, 2010
- 1182 views
How does that compare to upx on Linux? I would be curious to see a benchmark that tests both compression % and also uncompressing speed.
Jeremy
3. Re: Compressing executables.
- Posted by ChrisB (moderator) Nov 23, 2010
- 1110 views
Hi
As far as I'm aware, pretty favouarably. The reason I used it instead of upx, was because bound executables didn't run with upx, but startup times are perhaps a 1/2 second slower at most (vs unbound), which for the size of the program is fine. Main benefit is quicker inter surgery transfer speeds of the program via ftp. Apparently its giving me 69% compression (though not sure of the calculation)
4. Re: Compressing executables.
- Posted by bugfinder Nov 23, 2010
- 1080 views
Chris:
Are you using the latest version of upx upx307 ? It has many options and has versions for many platforms. For windows try upx --best --strip-relocs=0 followed by the filename. The --strip-relocs=0 means DO NOT STRIP OUT RELOCATION INFORMATION .
5. Re: Compressing executables.
- Posted by ChrisB (moderator) Nov 23, 2010
- 1052 views
Hi
I tried compressing a bound windows executable with upx, which reported that the exe was already compressed - I suspect that eui.exe is already compressed with upx. Upx compressed executables wouldn't work on Linux, hence the finding of gzexe.
Chris
6. Re: Compressing executables.
- Posted by jeremy (admin) Nov 23, 2010
- 1055 views
upx is available on Linux.
7. Re: Compressing executables.
- Posted by petelomax Nov 23, 2010
- 1033 views
upx is available on Linux.
Yes, but if you use that to compress a windows executable, it still won't run on Linux ;)
(OK, maybe on Wine, but then it wouldn't half be as funny)
