From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ken Raeburn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: PURESIZE increased (again) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:24:55 -0400 Message-ID: <16F5541A-23E7-473C-A4D5-61E3B6930526@raeburn.org> References: <87lku5u6tx.fsf@pacem.orebokech.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v749.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1146176812 23692 80.91.229.2 (27 Apr 2006 22:26:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:26:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 28 00:26:51 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FZEw3-0007VO-NY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:26:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FZEw3-0004wO-64 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:26:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FZEvo-0004uP-Bq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:25:52 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FZEvm-0004rZ-HL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:25:51 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FZEvm-0004rF-Az for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:25:50 -0400 Original-Received: from [204.127.200.84] (helo=sccrmhc14.comcast.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FZEyI-0003Tb-Rq; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:28:27 -0400 Original-Received: from raeburn.org (c-65-96-168-237.hsd1.ma.comcast.net[65.96.168.237]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc14) with ESMTP id <2006042722245701400206jje>; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:24:57 +0000 Original-Received: from [18.18.1.160] (NOME-KING.MIT.EDU [18.18.1.160]) by raeburn.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k3RMOvqN020563; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:24:57 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: Original-To: Eli Zaretskii X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.749.3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:53523 Archived-At: On Apr 27, 2006, at 16:38, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > 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. That is weird. Perhaps output from (garbage-collect) before and after loading the individual .elc files would show something useful? The byte and object counts *should* be the same (uh, unless the pathnames to the elc files are stored somewhere but el file pathnames are not). It might also be useful to check that the .elc files you two are getting (you've both done "make bootstrap", right?) are actually similar. Ken