Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!teddy!jpn
From: jpn@teddy.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Re: reducing size of exe files
Message-ID: <4064@teddy.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 4-Jun-87 10:49:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: teddy.4064
Posted: Thu Jun  4 10:49:56 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 6-Jun-87 08:41:51 EDT
References: <4044@amd.UUCP> <3320018@hpsrlc.HP.COM>
Reply-To: jpn@teddy.UUCP (John P. Nelson)
Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass.
Lines: 20

>>Microsoft has a program EXEPACK that comes with their compiler that uses
>>some scheme to pack any .exe file. This works on files >64K also.
>                     ^^^
>                     Microsoft claims that EXEPACK will work ONLY with code 
>generated by their compilers; they do not claim that it will work with
>anything else.
>
>>I think it packs nulls and removes debug and symbol table info and the like.

EXEPACK will PACK any .exe file, but the result may not work properly.
EXEPACK may append a run-time initialization module, which allows EXEPACK
to remove any large initialized buffers from the .exe image.  This appendage
apparently clobbers some of the registers that the "exec" call sets up,
but which MS-C does not need.  (Sorry, I don't have details).

Anyway, it is my experience that EXEPACK works with 95% of the programs I
have tried it on, although it is only infrequently that the compression
is worthwhile (i.e. saves multiple blocks on my hard disk).  I ALWAYS
save a copy of the original program before PACKing, just in case there
is a problem.