[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file |
Date: |
Sun, 11 Dec 2016 14:18:46 -0500 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> * Larger obarray. After startup, my Linux/GNU/X11 build has over
> * 15k symbols, and my Mac build has over 21k. The old obarray
> * size of 1511 meant average chain lengths of over 10 and 14.
> * Shorter chains mean less time spent in oblookup. And extra
> * slots are cheap.
This may be a good idea, but it has nothing to do with any particular
method of startup or dumping. So how about doing it unconditionally?
--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.
- Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file, Ken Raeburn, 2016/12/11
- Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file, Ken Brown, 2016/12/13
- Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file, Ken Raeburn, 2016/12/14
- Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2016/12/14
- Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file, Ken Raeburn, 2016/12/15
- Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file, Ken Raeburn, 2016/12/15
- Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/12/15