From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen@fastmail.net>
Subject: Re: Heap space when building SBCL packages
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 20:45:09 +0100
Message-ID: <m1v9muj1oa.fsf@khs-macbook.home>
References: <m1pnd3b0cn.fsf@ordinateur-de-catherine--konrad.home>
 <87sghz86cj.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87eetj7y7x.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48436)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <konrad.hinsen@fastmail.net>) id 1jGT0d-0000DW-43
 for help-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 15:45:16 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <konrad.hinsen@fastmail.net>) id 1jGT0c-0003Ie-3F
 for help-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 15:45:15 -0400
Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.25]:48057)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <konrad.hinsen@fastmail.net>)
 id 1jGT0b-0003I6-RS
 for help-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 15:45:14 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87eetj7y7x.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
List-Id: <help-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/help-guix>,
 <mailto:help-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix>
List-Post: <mailto:help-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:help-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-guix>,
 <mailto:help-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Help-Guix" <help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
To: Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz>, help-guix@gnu.org

Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> writes:

> You could also try playing with the
> `--dynamic-space-size` command line flag, e.g.
>
>   sbcl --dynamic-space-size 2048 ...

That was a good idea. It turns out that 1024 is just a bit too low to do
program-op, though load-system works. With 1280 I can do program-op on
numcl.

So it looks like SBCL 2.0.2 just needs a bit of extra memory compared to
older versions. Guillaume's suggestion of increasing the limit should
thus be sufficient.

Cheers,
  Konrad.