Re: --with-native-compilation build failure on 32-bit systems

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Andrea Corallo <akrl@sdf.org>
> Cc: larsi@gnus.org, jrm@ftfl.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org, emacs@FreeBSD.org
> Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 09:57:32 +0000
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> What I see comparing the two builds (my testbed is ATM on aff5961274) is
> >> that we overflow on both, but on the 64bit we do it a little later in
> >> the execution so the GC has the chance to collect ediff-hook before we
> >> overflow purespace.
> >
> > That's strange, because I just built the unexec build on a 64-bit
> > system, and it didn't overflow for me.
> >
> > Does it overflow on your system during bootstrap, i.e. when it loads
> > all the Lisp packages in source form?  Or does it overflow when it
> > loads the *.elc byte-compiled files?  Or is this a native-comp build,
> > and it overflows when loading the *.eln files?
> 
> Mine is a build with native compilation, there are many variables into
> play and indeed native compilation might be one of the main responsible
> for the higher use the purespace here.
> 
> It does overflow during bootstrap after having loaded the eln files.

How many more bytes do you need to avoid overflowing?

I guess we will need to enlarge SYSTEM_PURESIZE_EXTRA in the
native-comp build.  The question above will allow to figure out by how
much to enlarge it.