Menu

UPX 2.90 released with LZMA support

2006-10-12
2013-05-23
  • László Molnár

    Hi All!

    Please test the new beta version for possible regressions. You should specify the "--lzma" command line option to try out the new compression method.

    Thanks,Laszlo

     
    • mirskym

      mirskym - 2006-10-12

      Is there a Windows Mobile (CE) version available for this beta?

      BTW the link to the previous CE version in the thread below is broken again.

      Michael

       
    • László Molnár

      A native wince build is planned for version 2.91. But it would be nice if someone familiar with wince could advice how we should implement console support and/or interprocess communication for the GUI.

      L

       
    • c-j-hamster

      c-j-hamster - 2006-10-13

      great news! thnx for the work.

      is there anything special we should test?

       
    • László Molnár

      The runtime decompressor stub generator part of UPX got completely rewritten. So there is a chance that something breaks which worked before. Ie, any testing is good testing :-)

      L

       
      • Roy Tam

        Roy Tam - 2006-10-15

        I'm testing it with my Firefox builds since 10th Oct.
        http://pryan.org/mozilla/firefox/roytam1/

         
    • c-j-hamster

      c-j-hamster - 2006-10-15

      i tested a lot of small tools, everything went fine.

      also, i compressed the whole nero burning rom 6.6 folder, and it is running fine.

      i used lzma for all files, usually it compresses a lot faster (also tighter) on my old machine. i have no idea about decompression speed though.

      winupack compreses little bit better on small files, but it's not a big deal.
      on bigger files, most modern packers are close, nspack, pecompact, upack etc. not very surprising i suppose.

      all in all, i'm very happy but i feel sorry i didn't find any bugs yet.

       
    • Julian Salazar

      Julian Salazar - 2006-11-10

      Seems to work well, but doing upx --brute --lzma is sometimes worse than just doing upx --brute. What's the problem?

       

Log in to post a comment.