How to lower the disk space taken by my programs!
For Win dont compress .exe with upx or other things, use Installer without file compressing.
-> build a normal install.exe
-> this install.exe compress with 7-zip (ultra-mode) as .7z
-> run "copy /b 7zS.sfx + config.txt + install.7z install7z.exe
==>> smallest selfextracting install.exe
U can compress the 7zS.sfx with upx before.
config.txt:
;!@Install@!UTF-8!
RunProgram="install.exe"
;!@InstallEnd@!
-> build a normal install.exe
-> this install.exe compress with 7-zip (ultra-mode) as .7z
-> run "copy /b 7zS.sfx + config.txt + install.7z install7z.exe
==>> smallest selfextracting install.exe
U can compress the 7zS.sfx with upx before.
config.txt:
;!@Install@!UTF-8!
RunProgram="install.exe"
;!@InstallEnd@!
-
- Can't get richer than this
- Posts: 802
- Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 10:46 am
- Location: Estonia, Tallinn
- Contact:
UPXing the exe gives you smaller INSTALLED executables/dll's aswell. Not just a smaller installer.
In todays computers it is often actually better to UPX due to efficiency, because the disk I/O time needed to load a larger exe is often more than the CPU time needed to uncompress the exe in memory.
So I don't see why should one UPX the installer, but not the executables/dll's that go inside the installer.
UPX'ing the installer too is a good idea to try though, in addition to UPXing exe's/dll's beforehand.
In todays computers it is often actually better to UPX due to efficiency, because the disk I/O time needed to load a larger exe is often more than the CPU time needed to uncompress the exe in memory.
So I don't see why should one UPX the installer, but not the executables/dll's that go inside the installer.
UPX'ing the installer too is a good idea to try though, in addition to UPXing exe's/dll's beforehand.
Compilers: gcc-3.3.6, gcc-3.4.5, gcc-4.0.2, gcc-4.1.0 and MSVC6
OS's: Gentoo Linux, WinXP; WX: CVS HEAD
Project Manager of wxMUD - http://wxmud.sf.net/
Developer of wxGTK;
gtk+ port maintainer of OMGUI - http://www.omgui.org/
OS's: Gentoo Linux, WinXP; WX: CVS HEAD
Project Manager of wxMUD - http://wxmud.sf.net/
Developer of wxGTK;
gtk+ port maintainer of OMGUI - http://www.omgui.org/
With 7-zip u can make archives .7z or selfextracting archives .exe.
The user doesnt need 7-zip if selfextracting archive is distributed.
With 7zS.sfx + config.txt + archive.7z its possible to run a .exe after uncompress (see config.txt). The uncompressed file is stored in temp-folder, after ending the application the temp-folder deletes automatic.
The user doesnt need 7-zip if selfextracting archive is distributed.
With 7zS.sfx + config.txt + archive.7z its possible to run a .exe after uncompress (see config.txt). The uncompressed file is stored in temp-folder, after ending the application the temp-folder deletes automatic.
I will have small installer-size for faster downloading from internet. The size after install on harddisk is not so much important for me.
For best results with 7-zip its better to have not compressed files. Thats the reason why i use no compress-mode in installer and compress the final install.exe.
I think its not important faster to load an 5 MB app.exe uncompressed as to load an compressed 2 MB app.exe from normal harddisc. (But if loaded over network its important)
For best results with 7-zip its better to have not compressed files. Thats the reason why i use no compress-mode in installer and compress the final install.exe.
I think its not important faster to load an 5 MB app.exe uncompressed as to load an compressed 2 MB app.exe from normal harddisc. (But if loaded over network its important)
-
- Part Of The Furniture
- Posts: 1511
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 11:37 am
- Location: Singapore
- Contact:
i tried with jordan russel's inno setup compiler. it throws the "alreadypackedexception" i think i cant rememberleio wrote:UPXing the exe gives you smaller INSTALLED executables/dll's aswell. Not just a smaller installer.
In todays computers it is often actually better to UPX due to efficiency, because the disk I/O time needed to load a larger exe is often more than the CPU time needed to uncompress the exe in memory.
So I don't see why should one UPX the installer, but not the executables/dll's that go inside the installer.
UPX'ing the installer too is a good idea to try though, in addition to UPXing exe's/dll's beforehand.
-
- Super wx Problem Solver
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 8:21 am
- Location: Area 51
- Contact:
I use (Jordan Russell's) Inno Setup (http://www.jrsoftware.org/isinfo.php) and it has several levels of compression. I don't compress my program, just let Inno do it's job and I get very good results.
Still, if you want one of the smallest installers available, try NSIS (http://nsis.sourceforge.net/). Back when I tried it (about two years ago) it produced amazingly small installers. It was a bit of a pain in the butt to make an elaborate installer so I moved to Inno.
But if you want uncompromised installer size, NSIS is the way to go.
Still, if you want one of the smallest installers available, try NSIS (http://nsis.sourceforge.net/). Back when I tried it (about two years ago) it produced amazingly small installers. It was a bit of a pain in the butt to make an elaborate installer so I moved to Inno.
But if you want uncompromised installer size, NSIS is the way to go.
- Santiago
http://www.metalogicsw.com
http://www.metalogicsw.com
Inno Setup was great for me, for a while, but you get the same nice compression options with a much better look-and-feel from NSIS: http://nsis.sourceforge.net/ Don't get me wrong, I love Inno Setup, but as the OS has become more aesthetic, Inno has not progressed in this regard and is still creating NT-looking installers. It's true that setting up an NSIS installer is a little more troublesome than with Inno, but if you've conquered wx enough to write a production-level program, I don't see how this little bump in the road is anything to be afraid of.
Meanwhile, NSIS offers all kinds of different looks and the "Modern UI" is perhaps unparalleled in serving a proper first impression.
Meanwhile, NSIS offers all kinds of different looks and the "Modern UI" is perhaps unparalleled in serving a proper first impression.
Last edited by Tyler on Wed Jul 20, 2005 12:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Super wx Problem Solver
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 8:21 am
- Location: Area 51
- Contact:
Tyler,
When did you last look at Inno? They've had the "Modern UI" installer for a very long time now.
When did you last look at Inno? They've had the "Modern UI" installer for a very long time now.
- Santiago
http://www.metalogicsw.com
http://www.metalogicsw.com
-
- Super wx Problem Solver
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 8:21 am
- Location: Area 51
- Contact:
That's what I meant
Inno has had the "Modern UI" style for a while. Probably just about as long as NSIS actually.
They both look about the same.
Inno has had the "Modern UI" style for a while. Probably just about as long as NSIS actually.
They both look about the same.
- Santiago
http://www.metalogicsw.com
http://www.metalogicsw.com