From: Thomas G. <th...@gs...> - 2009-08-17 20:17:49
|
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 20:15, Vincent Torri<vt...@un...> wrote: > > > On Sun, 2 Aug 2009, David Seikel wrote: > >> On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 08:40:32 +0200 (CEST) Vincent Torri >> <vt...@un...> wrote: >> >>> while looking at the doc of UPX, i've found that lossless >>> (de)compression library: >>> >>> http://www.oberhumer.com/opensource/lzo/ >>> >>> which says to compress better and to be faster decompression than >>> zlib. >>> >>> There is no comparison numbers, but maybe it is worth trying to >>> compare zlib and that lib to see if it would be better to use it in >>> eet. >> >> There are other contenders, generally more modern compression schemes >> that are generally ignored coz things like zip, gz, and bz2 are >> too firmly embedded in our conciousness. Too much historical inertia >> is not good. >> >> So, if this is to be done, a more thorough roundup of them all would be >> the way to go. > > Maybe it's not so good for us: that library is GPL. If I'm not mistaken, > that would mean that eet must be GPL too, right ? > > Vincent > Yes, this is under a GPLv2+ license with additional commercial licensing, so I don't see any chance to use it in any non-GPL or non-commercial application - except calling the binary directly without including any sourcecode itself. But there are alternatives: The best one is most likely XZ (the successor of lzma) which usually compresses at a 2-digit percentage better compared to gzip at the cost of slightly more computing time to decompress and a lot more to compress (still better than bzip2 in any case). It's available under LGPL so, there should be no problems with the license. http://tukaani.org/xz/ |