[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Building Emacs overflowed pure space

From: Luc Teirlinck
Subject: Re: Building Emacs overflowed pure space
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:01:41 -0500 (CDT)

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

   No, this cannot explain the differences I was trying to investigate,
   because I made a point, as part of my testing, of building Emacs both
   with and without bootstrap.  I got the same numbers in both cases.

On the other hand, I guess that you read the following two messages in
which two people reported seeing a difference in pure-bytes-used
depending on the way they compiled Emacs?

   Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 20:01:25 +0900
   From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <address@hidden>
   Organization: Faculty of Science, Chiba University
   Cc: address@hidden
   Sender: address@hidden

   > The question is not what caused the recent addition to the pure
   > space, the question is why some people see overflow, while others
   > don't, on the same platform.

   Maybe I'm not completely following the related threads, but at least
   one can see such a difference as follows:

   $ make bootstrap
   -> 1210372 pure bytes used

   $ cd lisp
   $ make bootstrap-clean
   $ make compile EMACS=../src/emacs
   $ cd ..
   $ make clean
   $ make
   -> 1209036 pure bytes used
   (on Mac OS X 10.4.7, X11)

   I observed that .elc's compiled by bootstrap-emacs have `dolist'
   expanded by cl.el, whereas those compiled by emacs have
   subr.el-version.  Actually, bootstrap-emacs loads cl.el via preloaded
   .el files that contain (eval-when-compile (require 'cl)), where
   `eval-when-compile' just behaves like `progn'.

                                        YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu

   X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
   From: Evil Boris <address@hidden>
   Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 07:40:47 -0400
   Cancel-Lock: sha1:oxVdsPt4RABMvFYyjLvvrf0IEG0=
   Sender: address@hidden

   For what it's worth, I have been using the following recipe (taken
   from INSTALL.CVS, is it still valid advice?) for updating Emacs.  After
        cvs update 
   I do:

   % gmake
   % cd lisp
   % gmake recompile EMACS=../src/emacs
   % cd ..
   % gmake

   I have noticed that the amount of pure storage needed in the initial
   call to gmake is different from the one needed after recompile.
   (sparc-sun-solaris2.7, X toolkit).  Is this to be expected?

   Specifically, the last build I tried (Jul 4) required 1210824 pure
   bytes in second iteration and 1208688 in the first (so the latest
   increase does not suffice).


reply via email to

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