Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watdragon!rose!sbnicol
From: sbnicol@rose.waterloo.edu (Scott Nicol)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: LZEXE - Is it too good to be true?
Message-ID: <23005@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Date: 8 Apr 90 04:40:36 GMT
References: <4953@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <5954@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>
Sender: daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu
Organization: University of Waterloo
Lines: 24

In article <5954@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> melkins@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Michael R.G. Elkins) writes:
>In article <4953@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> pottera@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Alan T Potter) writes:
>>However, I am still wary - you don't get something like this for nothing!
>>Are there any 'gotchas' I should beware of?  Does anyone have any bad
>>experiences of using the system?
>
>Well, it works fine on some the programs, but there are a few that just 
>'stopped' working after a few uses, and now I have to get them *again*.

   It works fine for most .EXE files (and .COM files too, using the same
author's COMTOEXE program).  The program ALWAYS writes a backup of the
original file (with the extension .OLD), so you shouldn't have any trouble
recovering the original if the compressed program doesn't work (I'm
assuming that you don't erase the .OLD file before you test the new .EXE
file).  Also, there is an UNLZEXE program, which should be able to
recover the original from the compressed program.

    Any program that uses overlays is definitely out, though (the program
warns you about possible overlays).

- Scott
Email: sbnicol@rose.waterloo.edu  -or- ...!uunet!watmath!rose!sbnicol
SlowMail: 546 FallingBrook Dr., Waterloo, Ont., Canada, N2L 4N4.
Phone: (519) 725-1980