[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: PURESIZE increased (again)

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: PURESIZE increased (again)
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 19:59:15 +0300

> From: Andreas Schwab <address@hidden>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>, address@hidden
> Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 14:13:56 +0200
> Romain Francoise <address@hidden> writes:
> > Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> >> Romain, could you please tell why you increased BASE_PURESIZE by
> >> another 10,000?
> >
> > Because I built Emacs and there wasn't enough pure space available...
> > The log indicated 1200696 bytes used,
> Where do you see that?

I second the question.  How was that build configured, for what
variant of GNU/Linux, and which CPU?

> I see only 1198536 bytes (1877040 on 64bit).

And I see 1102088 in a GNU/Linux build without X.  I doubt that adding
X could bump it by 100K bytes.

I also doubt very much that the Windows build is so different from a
32-build on GNU/Linux.

So your results, Romain, look quite strange.  I think we need to
understand them before we decide to increase PURESIZE.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]