From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: PURESIZE increased (again) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:09:44 -0400 Message-ID: <87irotk7ip.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> References: <87lku5u6tx.fsf@pacem.orebokech.com> <200604272119.k3RLJ15n028730@jane.dms.auburn.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1146240713 23956 80.91.229.2 (28 Apr 2006 16:11:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:11:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Luc Teirlinck , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 28 18:11:50 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 1FZVZ5-0003kc-KF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 18:11:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FZVZ5-0003PD-24 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:11:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FZVXT-0002aH-DO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:09:51 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FZVXR-0002Z1-2w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:09:51 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FZVXQ-0002Yt-UE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:09:48 -0400 Original-Received: from [209.226.175.74] (helo=tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FZVaY-0001bC-9i; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:13:02 -0400 Original-Received: from alfajor ([70.55.140.75]) by tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20060428160944.TODZ16051.tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net@alfajor>; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:09:44 -0400 Original-Received: by alfajor (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 34170D741F; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:09:44 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: Eli Zaretskii In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 28 Apr 2006 08:22:23 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) 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:53560 Archived-At: >> But maybe variations tend to be larger for 64 bit than for 32? > AFAIU the byte compiling, there should be no variation at all on the > same architecture and OS, as long as the same files are loaded. I believe that some filenames end up in purespace, so the size of purespace might change depending on the compilation location or the installation location. This may explain small differences, but not the major one we're seeing here, Stefan