Are executable packers against the spirit of the contest?

[Dave Mullen]

I have seen on recent submissions that the decompression executable is packed with UPX, reducing it's size from 400k to about 150k inside the "archive9.exe" file.

Isn't that in violation of this rule?

Programs must run without input from other sources (files, network, dictionaries, etc.) under Windows or Linux without additional installations.

Surely the UPX packer itself is an "additional installation"?

[Dave Mullen]

And I suppose depending on the answer to the above, is there logically anything to stop us also packing the compressor executable also using UPX?

[Matt Mahoney]

Exe packers like UPX are allowed. But beware that some of the lesser known packers give false alarms to virus detectors.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hutter Prize" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hutter-prize...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hutter-prize/b7ee317a-2ce5-4a13-ae95-e1e1bd848b74n%40googlegroups.com.

[Dave Mullen]

Thank you for this clarification.

I have since realized that the compressor executable is already packed with UPX, and concatted with the compressed dictionary and article order.

Curse my aging brain, can't read code anymore :-(