Przemoc's binaries

[przemoc]

http://ftp.przemoc.net/pub/binaries/
http://binaries.przemoc.net/

Sometimes I build binaries that may be useful for others.
They may be related to compression (comp category) or not.

Recently I decided to provide a bit more user-friendly (and hopefully search-friendly too) front-end.
I also mention mirrors there, you know, just in case, to reduce bus factor.

Not much stuff for now (ect, pigz) and was already mentioned in the past in respective threads here, but it may grow in future.

---

EDIT (2018-02-23)

Presently available Windows binaries:
- Efficient Compression Tool
- lzip
- lzop
- pigz
- plzip

Links go to existing threads about these programs.

[joerg]

Wonderful! Thank you very much for the new windows binary from pigz!

I am very interested in a binary for windows xp 32bit
from the wonderful radyx-7z-compressor

https://github.com/conor42/Radyx/releases/tag/v0.9.2
https://github.com/conor42/Radyx/archive/v0.9.2.zip

can you please try to build such a binary?

p.s.
there are also other interesting compressing programs...

can you please try to build a windows-binary

from the new plzip 1.7 (http://download.savannah.gnu.org/rel...zip-1.7.tar.gz)

it would also nice to have a windows binary

from lzip 1.20 (http://download.savannah.gnu.org/rel...ip-1.20.tar.gz) ?
or from lzop 1.04 (http://www.lzop.org/download/lzop-1.04.tar.gz)

best regards

[przemoc]

Glad to read it's already useful to someone.

I no longer have XP or even care about it (even when I had it years ago, I was actually using XP64), so I'm not sure if my recent EXEs actually work correctly on XP. Can you confirm that?

I may give a try building some of the stuff you mentioned. I'll post about it here then.

I'll surely upload lzop at least. It practically builds out-of-the-box, but it's quite late on my end right now, so I'm postponing it for tomorrow. There are actually precompiled binaries on the official site, even for Windows, but somehow only for the older version, not for 1.04.

EDIT (2018-02-23)

I haven't compared 1.03 to 1.04 source-wise, but ChangeLog clearly indicates there was no important updates here, so differences that may show up will come from using different toolchains. I don't know which one Markus used back then in 2010, but it's definitely way older one than GCC 7.3 from MinGW-w64 in MSYS2 that I use now.

[przemoc]

lzop-1.04-w32-gcc-7.3.0-rev1-msys2.zip
lzop-1.04-w64-gcc-7.3.0-rev1-msys2.zip

[Gonzalo]

Hello przemoc! That your real name? In any case, I'm glad to found a user who cares about other users. Let me see if I understand exactly what you do. What is your skill set? How different are you binaries from the ones anyone can compile? Are they faster in execution? Smaller perhaps?
There is this Russian guy who used to write a lot in the forum; he compiled paq* programs some ~15 % faster than the best we can come up with. Another one is a bit of a reverse engineer, he can touch some values inside exes so they aren't rejected by older O.S. My versions of precomp are 15 to 30% faster than vanilla editions but my "secret" is no secret. I just replace -O values and cross my fingers hoping it doesn't crash...
So, what do you do? What compiler do you use? Please tell me is Intel's... It is the best for compressors. If that were the case, can I ask you to recompile like a gazillion executables?

[przemoc]

Hello przemoc! That your real name?

No, it's my nickname.

In any case, I'm glad to found a user who cares about other users.

I think you're exaggerating. I wrote that:
"Sometimes I build binaries that may be useful for others."
IOW:
I may sometimes build stuff that I think would be nice to have on Windows too, because:
a) I haven't seen precompiled version for Windows at all yet,
b) I haven't seen precompiled recent version for Windows yet.
And I'm simply sharing the results afterwards.

Let me see if I understand exactly what you do. What is your skill set? How different are you binaries from the ones anyone can compile? Are they faster in execution? Smaller perhaps?

I never stated that my binaries are meant to be better than those provided by others. They are meant to be simply available for others, because I build when something is not yet available (at least publicly, or I cannot find it). I'm not doing anything exceptional, (almost?) anyone can do it.

I use default build settings and introduce changes only if they're necessary to be able to build the software, if it doesn't build out-of-the-box. I build binaries statically from non-Windows PoV, so they should have no dependencies beside standard Windows DLLs.

There is this Russian guy who used to write a lot in the forum; he compiled paq* programs some ~15 % faster than the best we can come up with. Another one is a bit of a reverse engineer, he can touch some values inside exes so they aren't rejected by older O.S. My versions of precomp are 15 to 30% faster than vanilla editions but my "secret" is no secret. I just replace -O values and cross my fingers hoping it doesn't crash...

There are no secrets in my builds. I don't change optimization settings provided by the authors, but if I'll do so, it will be given in the build info.

So, what do you do? What compiler do you use? Please tell me is Intel's... It is the best for compressors.

I provided info regarding my build environment in the past on the forum. I use GCC from MinGW-w64 in up-to-date version of MSYS2's MinGW-w64 Win32/64 Shell environment. Nowadays it's:

gcc version 7.3.0 (Rev1, Built by MSYS2 project)

I even put basic info in archive names, so you don't have to guess...

If that were the case, can I ask you to recompile like a gazillion executables?

It isn't the case.

[Gonzalo]

Thank you for the thorough answer! Not what I was hoping for but at least now I know for sure.
And I should have read more carefully your posts. Even in the names is stated the type and version of the compiler.

[przemoc]

lzip-1.20-w32-gcc-7.3.0-rev1-msys2.zip
lzip-1.20-w64-gcc-7.3.0-rev1-msys2.zip

[joerg]

@przemoc: thank you very very much for the new lzop and lzip - binaries!

first test: the w32-binary seems to work under xp and under windows server 2003!

i will do further tests.

what about the new plzip 1.7 (http://download.savannah.gnu.org/rel...zip-1.7.tar.gz) ??

is it impossible to compile?
error messages?

best regards

[przemoc]

plzip-1.7-w32-gcc-7.3.0-rev1-msys2.zip
plzip-1.7-w64-gcc-7.3.0-rev1-msys2.zip

[joerg]

@przemoc: thank you very much for the very quick reaction! WOW!

in a first test it works well!

plzip -6 : 66 GBytes to 7,3 GBytes in 90 min

best regards

[Gonzalo]

@przemoc: thank you very much for the very quick reaction! WOW!

in a first test it works well!

plzip -6 : 66 GBytes to 7,3 GBytes in 90 min

best regards

Could you please compare it to lzma - lzma2 - radyx? Especially speed regarding mid and smallest size.
Also, RAM usage if you can compute it.
Thanks in advance!

[joerg]

@gonzalo: thanks for your interest

yes, of course i will to do this - but this need a little bit time for doing

[przemoc]

thank you very much for the very quick reaction!

You're welcome.

Mind that I created this thread in the first place to inform about new compression-related binaries I put in my ftp, because they may be useful for someone beside me.
It's not a build requests thread per se. I may fulfill some requests from time to time, though, if there will be any, like I did with yours, but please don't be demanding.

in a first test it works well!

Good to hear that.

plzip -6 : 66 GBytes to 7,3 GBytes in 90 min

Always test decompression too, because if you cannot successfully decompress stuff, it will be useless no matter how small it is after compression.

I am very interested in a binary for windows xp 32bit
from the wonderful radyx-7z-compressor

Does it mean that binaries provided in
https://github.com/conor42/Radyx/releases
don't work in XP?

If yes, then I may consider building it (otherwise it would be rather pointless, as I explained in my reply to Gonzalo earlier, I try to make available stuff that isn't already), but like before, I cannot guarantee it will work on XP, so you'll need to thoroughly test it on your own. Anyway, it won't happen soon, but when it will, I'll post about it here.

[joerg]

@przemoc: thank you again for building the new binaries

yes, the currently published radyx 0.93 x86 binary does not work under windows xp / windows server 2003
it would interesting to have such a binary for windows xp in the next mounths

for now i am testing your plzip-binary

thanks for the hint with "decompression-test"
for decompression i am using another compatible program
i dont love "write-only-backups"

best regards