From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Building Emacs overflowed pure space Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:16:25 +0300 Message-ID: References: <7dbe73ed0607180138x35e9d9bft3e42f20cb369795c@mail.gmail.com> <200607181855.k6IItgAV027751@jane.dms.auburn.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1153253809 10155 80.91.229.2 (18 Jul 2006 20:16:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:16:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, ralphm@members.fsf.org, mathias.dahl@gmail.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 18 22:16:47 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 1G2vzk-00080M-2b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 22:16:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2vzj-0001sw-AH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 16:16:39 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G2vzX-0001ry-7K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 16:16:27 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G2vzV-0001ra-P0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 16:16:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2vzV-0001rW-MW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 16:16:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.114.186.66] (helo=romy.inter.net.il) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1G2w2Q-0007pb-UF; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 16:19:27 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-228-156.inter.net.il [80.230.228.156]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id FHM97065 (AUTH halo1); Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:16:20 +0300 (IDT) Original-To: Luc Teirlinck In-reply-to: <200607181855.k6IItgAV027751@jane.dms.auburn.edu> (message from Luc Teirlinck on Tue, 18 Jul 2006 13:55:42 -0500 (CDT)) 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:57286 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 13:55:42 -0500 (CDT) > From: Luc Teirlinck > Cc: mathias.dahl@gmail.com, ralphm@members.fsf.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Different people get somewhat different values of pure-bytes-used. > Eli was wondering that this could be caused by some bug. I must > confess that I do not fully understand the problems (if any) involved, > but somebody suggested that the differences could be due to the way > you compile Emacs. This may make a difference as to whether and when > cl.el gets loaded during compiling. cl.el redefines some often used > functions, making their code longer. This would seem consistent with > the fact that people doing `make bootstrap' seem to get a slightly > higher value than Eli, who I believe does not usually do `make bootstrap'. 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. > I suggest to go back to increasing BASE_PURESIZE by increments of 10000. > Any lesser value just will result in too frequent problems. I don't think it's reasonable at this stage. We are not supposed to install changes that increase the pure size significantly; adding 10K will just risk wasting memory in the released Emacs.