Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: RE: RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3 Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 00:51:00 +1100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX) Thread-Index: AcHMJ7NcQNpsujAfTviUFjR+OHaOEwAABD+g From: "Robert Collins" To: "egor duda" Cc: "Lapo Luchini" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id g2FDpES00943 > -----Original Message----- > From: egor duda [mailto:deo AT logos-m DOT ru] > Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 12:42 AM > To: Robert Collins > > Not that i'm against inclusion of upx to cygwin distro -- > it's a normal package like many others after all, but i > really don't understand why somebody would want to use such a program. Very good points. There are some cases where it is definitely useful. I'd certainly do some performance testing before using on often called software - ie ash. But for something like setup.exe itself, download time reductions would be well worth a couple of extra page faults at runtime. As for mapping the image against the disk image or the pagefile, I think it's back to case by case testing. Certainly I can imagine that with a compressed exe on a NTFS partition, or a FAT16 compressed volume, that making the least random access hits back against the .exe is more efficient. Rob