Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:26:28 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Fred Backman <fredrick DOT backman AT pmail DOT net>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: optimizing vs packing .EXE (Re: e: Why the executables r so big ????)
In-Reply-To: <37E35D92.666CBF7E@pmail.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990921152606.19568S-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Sat, 18 Sep 1999, Fred Backman wrote:

> I agree as far as packing an .EXE goes. I don't know how UPX works,
> but I have a feeling it is no more than a packing tool, e.g. it does
> not modify any code but "only" removes redundant information and
> packs everything else.

No, it also compresses the code (and uncompresses it at run time).