X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id:	<10112182040.AA17813@clio.rice.edu>
Subject:	Re: GCC build with 2.03 refresh OK (Win2K, WinXP) - Ready for ?
To:	pavenis AT lanet DOT lv (Andris Pavenis)
Date:	Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:40:33 -0600 (CST)
Cc:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii), djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.A41.4.05.10112182144310.24980-100000@ieva06> from "Andris Pavenis" at Dec 18, 2001 09:48:34 PM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> > Now, I can get almost the exact same error in W95 by limiting the amount
> > of DPMI memory to 14336Kb.  So it takes 15Mb to compile a null program
> > with GPP 3.02.  
> 
> Didn't test gcc-3.0.2 now, but gcc-3.1 20011205 (experimental) compiles
> simple C or C++ program with only one printf in DOS session with 
> only 7 Mb DPMI memory. Using 'std::cout << "Hello" << std::endl;"
> instead in C++ increases minimal memory to about 16 Mb (failure
> with 12 Mb). Tests done under Win95 OSR2. 

This is consistent with my tests.  As a reference, C++ with 2.953 would
work in 3.5Mb of memory; C took less.  Since 16Mb of physical memory
is essentially free today (if you have new hardware) I don't see an 
issue with this for new machines.  Windows 95 systems (vintage mid
90s) quite frequently only have 16Mb of total memory - so the default
DPMI parameters might only provide about 8Mb or so.  If someone was
building relatively small modules and never read the FAQ about DPMI
setting from Auto to 65535 - they will see these failures when 2.953
worked fine (and quickly) for them.  

Maybe the zip picker needs to ask how much memory you have before
making a recommendation :-)

Progress ...

- Raw text -