From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Reiner Steib Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: PURESIZE increased (again) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:56:12 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87lku5u6tx.fsf@pacem.orebokech.com> Reply-To: Reiner Steib NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1146177525 25768 80.91.229.2 (27 Apr 2006 22:38:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:38:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 28 00:38:42 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 1FZF8E-0001UL-7K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:38:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FZF8D-0002uK-OW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:38:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FZF81-0002tm-Gp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:38:29 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FZF80-0002sX-79 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:38:29 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FZF7z-0002sS-V6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:38:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [134.60.1.1] (helo=mail.uni-ulm.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1FZFAw-0004d2-Fx; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:41:31 -0400 Original-Received: from bridgekeeper.physik.uni-ulm.de (bridgekeeper.physik.uni-ulm.de [134.60.10.123]) by mail.uni-ulm.de (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k3RMcJfw027410; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:38:20 +0200 (MEST) Original-Received: from viandante.physik.uni-ulm.de (bridgekeeper.physik.uni-ulm.de [134.60.10.123]) by bridgekeeper.physik.uni-ulm.de (Postfix) with SMTP id CDCCE117A2; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:38:18 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: (nullmailer pid 10212 invoked by uid 170); Thu, 27 Apr 2006 21:56:13 -0000 Original-To: Eli Zaretskii X-Face: #vK]N[`vqjuod*|)'[iD7/"3AB-ApT%fmN"LWAg@oS7OesGv~)n[OBTLM#I="J'Y^-7I I/ps7o_'IK@#-Rs{::DZ@O8yS|fexe,XslY[:dNWOb~>?mC-&i_c)say:"\IpA.5U.b]'NY; Pks{lb h.+#6%DpZuaK3dcHB`Av3zc:r!C%~s0&m, tWj]&}, qg.+0ww2gK%f!:GK|wMl.I!(voY*1"^li8"~B BNG)9LvPi?^DMR-GVDnZqhu*3Hi, +g=wFhI)BL6&u{EOVEHjVEVq~d?_}lMntWAc3(6?kftjc>_f>! g0wM(qPM$d5]^TT_Qyi&L?LGVG)SHN;Gk/,pkY9,~ Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:38:53 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110005 (No Gnus v0.5) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-DCC-EATSERVER-Metrics: gemini 1166; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 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:53525 Archived-At: On Thu, Apr 27 2006, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > These results are very strange indeed. I've built today's CVS on an > x86_64 box (Red Hat GNU/Linux) in 3 different ways: with GTK, with > Motif and with Lucid, and they all needed only 1881740 bytes, give or > take a few dozen bytes. My build was with GTK (on SUSE 9.2 GNU/Linux). > How come your build requires a whopping 275KB more? > > 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. Thanks for your investigations. > Do you have some local changes on your system, or is this a plain > "make bootstrap" of the CVS checkout, with all the defaults wrt > compiler switches, libraries, etc.? It was without "bootstrap". I've set MYCPPFLAGS='-DENABLE_CHECKING=1'. I use the same source tree for x86_64 and i686 with different exec-prefix: configure --prefix=[...]/HEAD --with-gtk \ --exec-prefix=[...]/HEAD-`uname -m` > (Not that I see how local changes to anything but the Lisp files > themselves could produce such bloat.) > > Does anyone have ideas as to what could cause such a significant > difference in pure storage use on two identical architectures? I have some (minor, IMHO) local changes. I will try tomorrow without any local changes and report back again. Bye, Reiner. -- ,,, (o o) ---ooO-(_)-Ooo--- | PGP key available | http://rsteib.home.pages.de/