From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Building Emacs overflowed pure space Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:01:41 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <200607182201.k6IM1fjg001522@jane.dms.auburn.edu> References: <7dbe73ed0607180138x35e9d9bft3e42f20cb369795c@mail.gmail.com> <200607181855.k6IItgAV027751@jane.dms.auburn.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1153260171 31232 80.91.229.2 (18 Jul 2006 22:02:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 22:02:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mathias.dahl@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, ralphm@members.fsf.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 19 00:02:49 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 1G2xeN-00088J-Ja for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 00:02:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2xeN-0006mX-6S for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 18:02:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G2xeD-0006mS-FP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 18:02:33 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G2xeC-0006mG-4p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 18:02:32 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2xeB-0006mD-VB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 18:02:31 -0400 Original-Received: from [131.204.53.104] (helo=manatee.dms.auburn.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1G2xgv-0007Q9-H4; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 18:05:21 -0400 Original-Received: from jane.dms.auburn.edu (jane.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.201]) by manatee.dms.auburn.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6IM2D0c004798; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:02:13 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from jane.dms.auburn.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jane.dms.auburn.edu (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k6IM1fsc001525; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:01:41 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by jane.dms.auburn.edu (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/Submit) id k6IM1fjg001522; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:01:41 -0500 (CDT) X-Authentication-Warning: jane.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: eliz@gnu.org In-reply-to: (message from Eli Zaretskii on Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:16:25 +0300) 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:57290 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii wrote: 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. On the other hand, I guess that you read the following two messages in which two people reported seeing a difference in pure-bytes-used depending on the way they compiled Emacs? Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 20:01:25 +0900 From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu Organization: Faculty of Science, Chiba University Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+teirllm=mail.auburn.edu@gnu.org > The question is not what caused the recent addition to the pure > space, the question is why some people see overflow, while others > don't, on the same platform. Maybe I'm not completely following the related threads, but at least one can see such a difference as follows: $ make bootstrap -> 1210372 pure bytes used $ cd lisp $ make bootstrap-clean $ make compile EMACS=../src/emacs $ cd .. $ make clean $ make -> 1209036 pure bytes used (on Mac OS X 10.4.7, X11) I observed that .elc's compiled by bootstrap-emacs have `dolist' expanded by cl.el, whereas those compiled by emacs have subr.el-version. Actually, bootstrap-emacs loads cl.el via preloaded .el files that contain (eval-when-compile (require 'cl)), where `eval-when-compile' just behaves like `progn'. YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ From: Evil Boris Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 07:40:47 -0400 X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 207-38-193-43.c3-0.wsd-ubr1.qens-wsd.ny.cable.rcn.com Cancel-Lock: sha1:oxVdsPt4RABMvFYyjLvvrf0IEG0= Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+teirllm=mail.auburn.edu@gnu.org For what it's worth, I have been using the following recipe (taken from INSTALL.CVS, is it still valid advice?) for updating Emacs. After cvs update I do: % gmake % cd lisp % gmake recompile EMACS=../src/emacs % cd .. % gmake I have noticed that the amount of pure storage needed in the initial call to gmake is different from the one needed after recompile. (sparc-sun-solaris2.7, X toolkit). Is this to be expected? Specifically, the last build I tried (Jul 4) required 1210824 pure bytes in second iteration and 1208688 in the first (so the latest increase does not suffice). Cheers, --Boris