From: Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT latnet DOT lv>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, "Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
Subject: Re: CLIO 2.04 exe to use UPX in the next update
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 09:22:30 +0300
User-Agent: KMail/1.4.7
References: <001201c27297$05d52c80$0a02a8c0 AT p4>
In-Reply-To: <001201c27297$05d52c80$0a02a8c0@p4>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200210140922.30663.pavenis@latnet.lv>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id g9E6Mhm01188
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

On Sunday 13 October 2002 12:00, Andrew Cottrell wrote:
> Does anyone have any problems if I strip and upx all of the exes when I do
> a re-build of the packages at clio.
>
> Please note that I compared using upx'd and standard exes to build the
> binary zip files and they came out to be about the same so I could not see
> any advantage when downloading the files, but when unziped the exes are
> smaller so they take up allot less space on the HDD.

There still seems to be one problem:

UPX compressed DJGPP executables (built with last GCC versions) fails to run
if uncompressed. For example I uploaded binaries of port of gcc-3.2 compressed 
with UPX. If one uncompress them, for example 'upx -d gcc.exe' , it no more 
runs. Bug report submitted (for UPX). The problem is present with latest 
version of UPX (1.23). I don't think it's so serious that I should reupload 
binaries already compressed with UPX, but maybe we should not make a new ones
before this is fixed.

Andris