[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PURESIZE increased (again)
From: |
Reiner Steib |
Subject: |
Re: PURESIZE increased (again) |
Date: |
Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:56:12 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110005 (No Gnus v0.5) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
On Thu, Apr 27 2006, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> These results are very strange indeed. I've built today's CVS on an
> x86_64 box (Red Hat GNU/Linux) in 3 different ways: with GTK, with
> Motif and with Lucid, and they all needed only 1881740 bytes, give or
> take a few dozen bytes.
My build was with GTK (on SUSE 9.2 GNU/Linux).
> How come your build requires a whopping 275KB more?
>
> Comparison of your GDB session with mine shows that each time a .el
> file is loaded, it uses up the exact same amount of pure storage in
> your build as in mine. But every .elc file takes more pure storage on
> your machine, sometimes only by 1KB, sometimes by as much as 20KB.
Thanks for your investigations.
> Do you have some local changes on your system, or is this a plain
> "make bootstrap" of the CVS checkout, with all the defaults wrt
> compiler switches, libraries, etc.?
It was without "bootstrap". I've set
MYCPPFLAGS='-DENABLE_CHECKING=1'. I use the same source tree for
x86_64 and i686 with different exec-prefix:
configure --prefix=[...]/HEAD --with-gtk \
--exec-prefix=[...]/HEAD-`uname -m`
> (Not that I see how local changes to anything but the Lisp files
> themselves could produce such bloat.)
>
> Does anyone have ideas as to what could cause such a significant
> difference in pure storage use on two identical architectures?
I have some (minor, IMHO) local changes. I will try tomorrow without
any local changes and report back again.
Bye, Reiner.
--
,,,
(o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo--- | PGP key available | http://rsteib.home.pages.de/
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), (continued)
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Reiner Steib, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Luc Teirlinck, 2006/04/27
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Ken Raeburn, 2006/04/27
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), David Kastrup, 2006/04/27
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Ken Raeburn, 2006/04/27
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), David Kastrup, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Ken Raeburn, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again),
Reiner Steib <=
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Reiner Steib, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Andreas Schwab, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Reiner Steib, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/29
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Stefan Monnier, 2006/04/29
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/29
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Andreas Schwab, 2006/04/29
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Luc Teirlinck, 2006/04/21