From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 18 18:48:28 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56C24106564A for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2010 18:48:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com) Received: from mail.r-bonomi.com (ns2.r-bonomi.com [204.87.227.129]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 294018FC14 for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2010 18:48:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (from bonomi@localhost) by mail.r-bonomi.com (8.14.3/rdb1) id o9IIkRi0011803 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:46:27 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:46:27 -0500 (CDT) From: Robert Bonomi Message-ID: <201010181846.o9IIkRi0011803@mail.r-bonomi.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libxul compilation problem X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 18:48:28 -0000 > Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:28:15 +0200 > From: Fernando_Apesteguia > Subject: Re: libxul compilation problem > > > I still refuse to think 1GB is low ;) though I could be wrong. One gig of RAM is not the problem. 1.25 gig total of VM _is_. I have some stuff I run on an *OLD* (next year it will be old enough to vote :) 80486 box with only 96 megs or actual RAM, but 2gig of VM. "Compiling" is a complicated process, all the more so with the features that have been added to the languages over the years. *and* the need to support multiple character sets, -especially- those that don't fit in an 8-bit enumerationn. these tHings, along with improvements in code optimization techniques, have combined to radically increae the footprint that a language compiler requires these days. Factor in the increasing size of the applicaiton modules themselves, and it should be -no- surprise that compilation of an app of significant complexity has a large memory footprint. I've got a FBSD 7.2 box that shows 80 megs of 'actively used' VM with the basic system services running. I've got a -dinosaur- running a *BSD releae from th prior century, running a the same stuff, -plus- a webserver, in only 16 megs of active memory. 'code bloat' is a fact of life.