binutils compile error

Greg T Hill greghill at
Thu Aug 10 04:18:53 PDT 2000

Thomas 'Balu' Walter wrote:

> +-Greg T Hill-(greghill at[10.08.00 09:54]:
> > Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> >
> > > To see if you are really going low on memory do this:
> > > start compiling binutils and in a second terminal (either a VC (Virtual
> > > Console) or xterm or something similar) run this command:
> > >         watch -n 1 free
> >
> > I read this and ran free out of curiosity.  It reports I have  64280k total
> > memory, however I have 128 megs ram installed and recognized by the BIOS.
> > I tried it on another machine also with 128 megs of ram and get the same
> > result.  My third box has  32 megs and it reports 29044k.  "man free" fails to
> > enlighten.  Can anyone  explain to me what this means?
> Some Biosses fail to report the right mem-size above 64M. See
> for more information...
>      Balu

DUH......  I've seen this before, but misinterpreted it, since my bios reported my
RAM just fine on boot.  I noticed this a long time ago while looking around in KDE
Control Center but half ascribed it to a problem with KDE and put it on a mental
list of things to check out and  forgot about it.  Wiped out by buffer overrun?  So
for about a year I've been running on 64 megs in Linux.....  I even remember now
that I had a TODO file to add the mem=128M to lilo.conf on my Caldera
installation,  but I was playing with KDE User Manager  in LFS and  removed that
user from LFS and much to my surprise it automatically deleted the home directory
as well!!!  My backup didn't contain that item and it all kind of slid until this
thread partially jogged my memory....( its the second thing to go, I forget what
the first is.....;-).

Gerard: A little tip about this in the Testing the System section make a nice
addition to the book ....or maybe in the beginning, it could vastly improve compile
times for some of us maroons  <GROAN>.

Thanks for the tip,  Balu.  By the way, there is still about 3 megs unreported.  Is
this not reported because it is taken up by the uncompressed kernel and modules?
Not that I'm bitchin' about an instant  97.6% increase in RAM, but enquiring minds
want to know.

Mail archive:
IRC access: server: port: 6667 channel: #LFS
Unsubscribe: email lfs-discuss-request at and put
"unsubscribe" (without the quotation marks) in the body of the message
(no subject is required)

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list