On Sat, 3 Jul 1999 13:30:11 -0500, Brian C. Grayson wrote:

>   0.  How much memory do your boot messages say you have?
>     (dmesg | grep "mem.*=").  If we add up the pieces here,

real mem  = 7995392
avail mem = 3891200

>     1136K+744K+104K+584K = 2568K, which means that the kernel (and
>     any buffer space it is using) is chewing up 5.5M -- that's too
>     large.  It should be around 2-3M.  It could be that NetBSD
>     didn't recognize the full 8M, or that you're using one of the
>     install-kernels that has the entire contents of / inside it,
>     or something like that.

-rwxr-xr-x  1 root  wsrc  3091323 May  7 21:27 /netbsd

Looks like I have to get rid of the install-kernel. That requires
building a new one, doesn't it? ;-)

>   1.  You need more RAM -- cc1 is trying to use 4252K of memory
>     (sort of), but the 348K that it is using, plus the 584K free,
>     are nowhere near enough, so it'll "page" a lot and take forever.
>     Popping just another 4M in there should do wonders for your
>     compile speed....

Unfortunately people still want lots of money for the old SIMMs (if
there's more than 1M on them). Hopefully I can get another 16M next
week, which might speed up things...

>   If you still have Linux on this machine, it might be
> interesting to look at top during a kernel build, and see if

Well, the disk is small too...

> the GNU make uses significantly less memory.  Linux uses .o's
> scattered throughout the source tree, which means it does
> recursive makes, so each make process probably doesn't get too
> large.  NetBSD does all of the .o's for a kernel in a single
> directory, which has many advantages, but one disadvantage is
> that the single make process now needs to keep track of a whole
> lot of info!
> 
>   One alternative to speed up your compiles a bit would be to do
> "make -n > buildme" followed by "sh -e buildme", followed by a
> "make" to make sure everything got built okay.  In this manner,
> make will figure out everything that needs to be done, save all
> that information, and exit (giving you 4M back).  Then, sh and
> the compiles will happen, and since sh is small, you'll have 3-4M
> more of RAM/swap/vm-in-general for the compiles.

So this is the difference. And another one, I just dicovered: support
is much better ;-)

thanks very much for your clear answer
boris

-- 
______________________________________________________________________
 Boris Kimmina:                            kimmina@myrna.in-berlin.de
 Myrnas Fernsehdienst:                  http://super.tacheles.de/fspg