* 386 maximum segment size of 16Mb
@ 1995-11-02 16:21 G.David
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: G.David @ 1995-11-02 16:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
Hello again,
Has anybody noticed the problem compiling /sys/src/libtiff/tif_fax3.c on
a 386? It seems 8c needs more than 16Mb of data space to build this one.
The real question, has anybody looked into increasing this limit? (look
in /sys/src/9/pc/mem.h, SEGMEMSIZE, I think, set to 16.)
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* 386 maximum segment size of 16Mb
@ 1995-11-02 17:14 G.David
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: G.David @ 1995-11-02 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
I hate replying to my own mail, but I guess I wasn't finished... :-)
>The real question, has anybody looked into increasing this limit? (look
>in /sys/src/9/pc/mem.h, SEGMEMSIZE, I think, set to 16.)
Make that SEGMAPSIZE.
Also several of the machines have this in mem.h:
#define SEGMAPSIZE 64 /* 16 is for wooses */
This would imply that all is necessary is to change 16 to 64 in pc/mem.h,
but that would be too simple...
Thanks again.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* 386 maximum segment size of 16Mb
@ 1995-11-02 18:28 G.David
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: G.David @ 1995-11-02 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
>changing SEGMAPSIZE works fine.
>It incurs overhead allocated Segment structures
>so 16 seemed reasonable for a terminal.
I agree.
> We really
>dont use PC's to compile.
I was compiling on my cpu server, which is just a bigger PC.
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* 386 maximum segment size of 16Mb
@ 1995-11-02 18:38 philw
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: philw @ 1995-11-02 18:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
changing SEGMAPSIZE works fine.
It incurs overhead allocated Segment structures
so 16 seemed reasonable for a terminal. We really
dont use PC's to compile.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* 386 maximum segment size of 16Mb
@ 1995-11-03 8:33 Nigel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Nigel @ 1995-11-03 8:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
>
> changing SEGMAPSIZE works fine.
> It incurs overhead allocated Segment structures
> so 16 seemed reasonable for a terminal. We really
> dont use PC's to compile.
>
>
Well, wouldn't you know. I was going to post all this yesterday, and
as we get up earlier in the morning this side of the pond, I would
have got there first. I fixed SEGMAPSIZE to 32, so must be half a
woos (?sp).
What you have to watch is the linker! It gets to 14 meg doing
9pcdisk; it gets to 20mb doing ghostscript, even without any useful
printer drivers added in (which was what I was doing). Anyone else
tried compiling in, say, HP deskjet support?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1995-11-03 8:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1995-11-02 16:21 386 maximum segment size of 16Mb G.David
1995-11-02 17:14 G.David
1995-11-02 18:28 G.David
1995-11-02 18:38 philw
1995-11-03 8:33 Nigel
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).