> > That could explain it, but I have built and compiled packages under libc5
> > without any problems in the past. I cannot accept that memory requirements
> > have increased to that extent in glibc2 such that a machine with 32MB of
> > RAM and a swap file of 26MB cannot do things that it did previously. :o(
>
> I've seen the same thing. Glibc programs seem to have a bit
> larger memory footprint, in terms of swap usage. The overall
> performance of the system doesn't seem to suffer, however.
Now that I think of it, the increased memory footprint of
a glibc system probably is because some of the 'standard'
programs aren't available in glibc format yet (nutscrape,
x11amp, etc).
This causes (large) chunks of library code to be loaded
twice. Once from libc5 and once from libc6. This isn't
much of a problem, but it just gives more code (cache)
usage...
Rik.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~riel/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu