Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Jürgen Hunold (hunold+lists.Boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-25 08:02:07

Hash: SHA1

Hi Volodya

On Friday 25 July 2003 14:19, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Hi Jürgen,

> > Vladimir, what must I provide so you can debug this ?
> First, I'm interested to know if this difference if observable if you
> run bjam with the "-n" switch. Second, it would be very interesting
> to find the exact date at which bjam started to eat more memory than
> needed. I did not observe any such effect on my project.

Ok. First, I observe the same behaviour with bjam -n.
It uses 230 MB for header-scannning, I think and then starts using up
memory while putting out 20x "patience".

I've done a quick check with M5 and it works fine. It needs 228 MB for
the first step (header-scannnig) and then about 260-280 MB.
The interesting thing is that M5 reports

bjam Version 2
4x patience
...found 25611 targets...
...updating 1 target...

and M6 (current CVS) reports:
bjam Version 2
22 x patience
...found 39385 targets...
...updating 1 target...

So, M6 even somehow "finds" more targets then M5. Any Ideas ?

Yours, Jürgen

- --
* Dipl.-Math. Jürgen Hunold ! Institut für Verkehrswesen, Eisenbahnbau
* voice: ++49 511 762-2529 ! und -betrieb, Universität Hannover
* fax : ++49 511 762-3001 ! Appelstrasse 9a, D-30167 Hannover
* hunold_at_[hidden] !
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux)



Boost-Build list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at