DonationCoder.com Software > Post New Requests Here

All AutoHotkey (AHK) coders read: No more upx packing of compiled ahk utils

<< < (8/8)

MilesAhead:
This issue caused me to look into some of the pros/cons of UPX compression.  I can't seem to find the links right now.-MilesAhead (August 29, 2010, 06:02 PM)
--- End quote ---

f0dder wrote a nice article about (some of) the reasons why exe compression is bad:

http://f0dder.reteam.org/packandstuff.htm

You can add the never ending problems with false positives to that.
-Jibz (August 30, 2010, 01:25 AM)
--- End quote ---

Recognition of UPX may have triggered false positives but I think many of these av apps are seeing scripting code wrapped as an exe.  Many will flag compiled scripts UPX or no UPX I'm thinking. I know Malwarebytes does.   I have to empty my recycle bin of old compiled scripts or it sucks them up and wants to reboot my machine to purge them.  It seems to sick any ahk or autoit3 script compiled to exe.

MilesAhead:
There are adjustments to zip compression - it supports a few different algorithms, and the most common one (deflate) can have compression characteristics adjusted; not much point in going for less than maximum compression on today's hardware, though :). The .7z and .rar formats have fairly more decent algorithms, but they also have a huge advantage over .zip: solid compression, which matters a lot when your archive includes a lot of small files (typical for source code distribution).
-f0dder (August 30, 2010, 01:12 PM)
--- End quote ---

Maybe you can tell me which (free) zipper you are using? I looked at four and didn't see any "more thorough" setting for .zip format.  Only other formats.

f0dder:
I use WinRAR - it isn't free, but it supports store/fastest/fast/normal/good/best for both .rar and .zip. Haven't tested how it affects compression ratio for .zip, so it could be that in reality it only supports store and one form of deflate - *shrug*. I thought the info-zip commandline zipper supported adjusting compression ratio, but can't find a reference to it in the manual.

MilesAhead:
Thanks for the feedback.  At the size of my stuff even a v90 dial-up it's only a few seconds difference on the download.  Plus some newbs may wonder why there's a .7z file inside their .zip file.  So it's not really worth messing with it at this point.  Zip may not be a the best but it's built into Windows. Pretty much guaranteed to be there even for the newbiest newbs. :)

edit: I did find out 7-zip command line implementation has a switch for more thorough .zip compression.  But at the size of my files, the archive is only about 1 or 2 KB smaller.  Guess I'll stick with 7-zip shell integrated version.  .7z does come out a bit smaller but "file not found" is about a fate comparable to death. Too much risk and not much reward trying to change links. If I was just starting now I'd probably go with .7z format though.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page