[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64
From: |
Thomas Stein |
Subject: |
Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64 |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:58:39 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.1 |
On Friday 14 April 2006 16:52, Duncan wrote:
> Well, when you get back... I just tried compiling it with gcc-3.4.6, and
> yes, it /does/ use that memory. I normally have my ulimit -v (virtual
> memory limit, total a single process is allowed to use, including swap)
> set to a gigabyte (1048576 KB), and that errored out. It needs more than
> that much memory including swap, here, altho I am running CXXFLAGS a bit
> different than most.
Hola.
My ulimit is set to unlimited so this can*t be the problem. I have 2Gig of Ram
by the way.
commander ~ # ulimit -a
core file size (blocks, -c) 0
data seg size (kbytes, -d) unlimited
file size (blocks, -f) unlimited
pending signals (-i) 16375
max locked memory (kbytes, -l) 32
max memory size (kbytes, -m) unlimited
open files (-n) 1024
pipe size (512 bytes, -p) 8
POSIX message queues (bytes, -q) 819200
stack size (kbytes, -s) 8192
cpu time (seconds, -t) unlimited
max user processes (-u) 16375
virtual memory (kbytes, -v) unlimited
file locks (-x) unlimited
cheers
t.
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: 0.92 amd64, (continued)
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Stein, 2006/04/12
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/12
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Stein, 2006/04/13
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/13
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Stein, 2006/04/13
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/13
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Fricke, 2006/04/13
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Stein, 2006/04/13
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/14
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/14
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64,
Thomas Stein <=
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/18
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Stein, 2006/04/18
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Stein, 2006/04/24
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/24
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Per Hedeland, 2006/04/24