walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue, 16 May 2006 11:57:42 -0700:
> But all is well now -- both pan and thunderbird like gcc 3.4.5 :o) Off the wall question, but how much memory do you have, and you are on x86, right? The reason I ask is because I'm on amd64 and using the (still masked) gcc-4.1.0. Compiling PAN with 4.1.0 only takes ~200 MB on amd64, so I had no problem. Someone else who was running ~amd64's 3.4.6 ran into serious issues, and we discovered that at least on amd64, pan requires 1.3 GB of memory at one point in its compile process, when compiled with gcc-3.4.6! 1.3GB is quite a bit different from ~200 MB! So anyway, since then, I've been a bit curious what sort of memory PAN requires to compile on x86 with gcc 3.4.x as compared to 4.1.0. I suspect the 1.3 gig requirement is arch related, and doesn't occur on x86, but I've yet to verify that, so am interested in your results. Unless you had problems, you probably didn't monitor memory while compiling, so you probably don't know what it took. However, knowing how much memory you have, especially if it's half a gig or less, will at least provide a ballpark figure. BTW, Gentoo's slotting and gcc-config make it easy to have multiple gcc versions installed and switch between them. The guy with the problem (and only a gig of memory) unmasked and merged gcc-4.1.0, and had no more problems compiling PAN. It just took us awhile to figure out that was the problem, because we had absolutely no reason to suspect the memory usage between the two gcc versions was /that/ much different! -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman _______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list Pan-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
