[exelist] Re: Which PE compressor/protector?

["Aitor G?mez Gonz?lez" <aitor.gomez@...>]

>   I just want to root out one misunderstanding: Neither me, nor the
>   authors of 
>   UPX or ASPACK are crackers! We are maybe friends of crackers, BUT WE
>   ARENT CRACKERS OURSELF!!! 
>    
>   Bye ANAKiN 

OK, I was wrong, sorry for the misunderstunding.



> Hi, 
>   
> MSVC++ DLLs seems to be a problem for all PE protector.... the reason
> is easy : those PE DLLs use forwarded API...SO FAR I never saw a single
> PE layer supporting this... may be it is time.

Thanks for the info.

> BTW : If ur boss wanna spend 2500$ I think coders of UPX, PE-Pack & so
> on will be glad to accept a such registration ;). After all Comercial
> crap are just like shareware... just a bit more expensive ;) hehehe

Uhm, I don't know ;-)

> G-RoM 





> What packer costs $2500? 

Ooops!  I was talking about a CAD program, it was only an example :)

>   Also you shouldn't go with ASPACK it failes on machines with
>   excessive amounts of RAM, like my machine.
>    
>   Sam 

The program I was talking about the other day was tested on a Pentium II
300 MHz / 96 Mb RAM / NT4 SP4.  ASPack compressed executables were fully
tested (maybe not full enough) and no problem rised.  Most of the apps
will run (are running) on PII 450 Mhz / 128 RAM / NT4 SP4.  My time is
getting over (I have only two more weeks), decision is still in the air,
any more opinions about this?


Thanks in advance,
Aitor.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/exelist
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com