From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: PURESIZE increased (again)
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:39:32 +0300
Message-ID: <u1wtxqx1n.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <ur73yyp4g.fsf@gnu.org> <jek69pogzf.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
	<umzelzcbg.fsf@gnu.org> <v9ejzsb36t.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>
	<uwtdkulm9.fsf@gnu.org> <v9odyw2c54.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>
	<ulktzv07f.fsf@gnu.org> <v9fyk0o38r.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>
	<u1wvihhya.fsf@gnu.org> <v964ku8yyr.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>
	<uslnyfejm.fsf@gnu.org> <v94q0dkfon.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>
	<uk699fz9s.fsf@gnu.org> <v9fyjxei46.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>
	<u7j58fm9d.fsf@gnu.org> <v9lksj713l.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>
	<uhd32cv5z.fsf@gnu.org> <v9d5diibsr.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>
	<uodx2qnoa.fsf@gnu.org> <jewtbqz2pm.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
	<u64jaqf30.fsf@gnu.org> <jeslmeklhp.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1149925220 19693 80.91.229.2 (10 Jun 2006 07:40:20 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:40:20 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 10 09:40:18 2006
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
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 1Foy4u-0007Dj-Eu
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:40:16 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Foy4t-0005Bl-KR
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 03:40:15 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Foy4J-00059C-HC
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 03:39:39 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Foy4H-00056c-Ib
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 03:39:38 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Foy4H-00056I-3Z
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 03:39:37 -0400
Original-Received: from [192.114.186.66] (helo=romy.inter.net.il)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FoyCU-0001Eg-OI
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 03:48:06 -0400
Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-164-172.inter.net.il
	[80.230.164.172]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA)
	with ESMTP id EVQ85791 (AUTH halo1);
	Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:39:31 +0300 (IDT)
Original-To: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
In-reply-to: <jeslmeklhp.fsf@sykes.suse.de> (message from Andreas Schwab on
	Sat, 10 Jun 2006 00:33:22 +0200)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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:55806
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/55806>

> From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 00:33:22 +0200
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > The overflow happens on 9.2, but not on 10.0.  Is it plausible that
> > GCC 3.3.4 on SuSe 9.2 produces code with higher alignment requirements
> > than GCC 4.0.2 on SuSe 10.0?
> 
> I don't think so.  And I cannot reproduce the problem: there are only
> 1207936 pure bytes used when building on 9.2, exactly the same as on 10.0.

So it's not the OS and not GCC.  What else can possibly affect this?
Would a list of installed packages from Reiner help get a clue?