mcdonald@sask.UUCP (Shane McDonald) (09/20/85)
Can someone explain this to me? I have a CoCo II running OS9 with WordPak II installed. I compiled a long C program, and the size of the program ended up being about 5/8 the size of my free memory. But, when I tried to run the program, I got an error message saying that there wasn't enough memory. Oh, darn, I thought. That's when I discovered that the program was only about 5/8 the size of my memory, not including, of course, memory used for the stack. Perplexed, I decided to see if I could load the program into memory. It loaded fine, and told me I still had about 20K of memory left. So, I tried to run it now. It ran fine with no memory problems. Can someone explain why I had to load it into memory first? -- Shane McDonald (ihnp4!sask!mcdonald)
brad@laidbak.UUCP (Bradley Bosch) (09/24/85)
How much memory was required for the stack (data segment) for your program? I have noticed a similar problem which seems to be related to using full path names to execute a program instead of executing them from the execution directory with just the program name. The program I was trying to execute was very large. Data and code together amounted to about 20 pages less than the memory available. If I changed the execution directory to the directory containing the program, it worked fine. If instead, I executed the program with the full path name, I got an out of memory error. I tried this with more than one large program with the same results. If I write a small machine code program which just exec's the larger program using the full path name, and then execute the smaller program, the larger program would run ok. This to me would seem to indicate a problem with the shell, but I suppose it could be more complicated. I called the Color Computer support group at Fort Worth, but all they could tell me was that they couldn't help me. The person I talked to tried to tell me that it was because of the memory required to hold the buffers for the directories in the path. I would be surprised if a full path name required more than one extra buffer page. Why would they open the directory for the next element in the path before they closed the last one? I tried to explain to him that it couldn't possibly require 20 extra pages, but he didn't seem to follow my reasoning. I goaded him in to promising to check on the problem for me and call me back, but of course he never did. Does Microware have a support number? Perhaps if I call Microware I might be able to talk to someone who knows what they are talking about. The small program I mentioned above is the way I use to get around the limitations of the space available on a 40 track double sided disk. I have more programs than will fit on my system disk. I have a program which generates these small programs from a template. I call it link.ex. Happily Hacking at OS-9, Brad Bosch ...!ihnp4!laidbak!brad Newsgroups: net.micro.6809 Subject: Re: Can someone explain this? Summary: Memory problem with full path name execution under OS-9? Expires: References: <279@sask.UUCP> Sender: Reply-To: brad@laidbak.UUCP (Bradley Bosch) Followup-To: Distribution: net Organization: Lachman Associates, Inc., Westmont Il. Keywords: OS-9 Shell How much memory was required for the stack (data segment) for your program? I have noticed a similar problem which seems to be related to using full path names to execute a program instead of executing them from the execution directory with just the program name. The program I was trying to execute was very large. Data and code together amounted to about 20 pages less than the memory available. If I changed the execution directory to the directory containing the program, it worked fine. If instead, I executed the program with the full path name, I got an out of memory error. I tried this with more than one large program with the same results. If I write a small machine code program which just exec's the larger program using the full path name, and then execute the smaller program, the larger program would run ok. This to me would seem to indicate a problem with the shell, but I suppose it could be more complicated. I called the Color Computer support group at Fort Worth, but all they could tell me was that they couldn't help me. The person I talked to tried to tell me that it was because of the memory required to hold the buffers for the directories in the path. I would be surprised if a full path name required more than one extra buffer page. Why would they open the directory for the next element in the path before they closed the last one? I tried to explain to him that it couldn't possibly require 20 extra pages, but he didn't seem to follow my reasoning. I goaded him in to promising to check on the problem for me and call me back, but of course he never did. Does Microware have a support number? Perhaps if I call Microware I might be able to talk to someone who knows what they are talking about. The small program I mentioned above is the way I use to get around the limitations of the space available on a 40 track double sided disk. I have more programs than will fit on my system disk. I have a program which generates these small programs from a template. I call it link.ex. Happily Hacking at OS-9, Brad Bosch ...!ihnp4!laidbak!brad Newsgroups: net.micro.6809 Subject: Re: Can someone explain this? Summary: Memory problem with full path name execution under OS-9? Expires: References: <279@sask.UUCP> Sender: Reply-To: brad@laidbak.UUCP (Bradley Bosch) Followup-To: Distribution: net Organization: Lachman Associates, Inc., Westmont Il. Keywords: OS-9 Shell How much memory was required for the stack (data segment) for your program? I have noticed a similar problem which seems to be related to using full path names to execute a program instead of executing them from the execution directory with just the program name. The program I was trying to execute was very large. Data and code together amounted to about 20 pages less than the memory available. If I changed the execution directory to the directory containing the program, it worked fine. If instead, I executed the program with the full path name, I got an out of memory error. I tried this with more than one large program with the same results. If I write a small machine code program which just exec's the larger program using the full path name, and then execute the smaller program, the larger program would run ok. This to me would seem to indicate a problem with the shell, but I suppose it could be more complicated. I called the Color Computer support group at Fort Worth, but all they could tell me was that they couldn't help me. The person I talked to tried to tell me that it was because of the memory required to hold the buffers for the directories in the path. I would be surprised if a full path name required more than one extra buffer page. Why would they open the directory for the next element in the path before they closed the last one? I tried to explain to him that it couldn't possibly require 20 extra pages, but he didn't seem to follow my reasoning. I goaded him in to promising to check on the problem for me and call me back, but of course he never did. Does Microware have a support number? Perhaps if I call Microware I might be able to talk to someone who knows what they are talking about. The small program I mentioned above is the way I use to get around the limitations of the space available on a 40 track double sided disk. I have more programs than will fit on my system disk. I have a program which generates these small programs from a template. I call it link.ex. Happily Hacking at OS-9, Brad Bosch ...!ihnp4!laidbak!brad Newsgroups: net.micro.6809 Subject: Re: Can someone explain this? Summary: Memory problem with full path name execution under OS-9? Expires: References: <279@sask.UUCP> Sender: Reply-To: brad@laidbak.UUCP (Bradley Bosch) Followup-To: Distribution: net Organization: Lachman Associates, Inc., Westmont Il. Keywords: OS-9 Shell How much memory was required for the stack (data segment) for your program? I have noticed a similar problem which seems to be related to using full path names to execute a program instead of executing them from the execution directory with just the program name. The program I was trying to execute was very large. Data and code together amounted to about 20 pages less than the memory available. If I changed the execution directory to the directory containing the program, it worked fine. If instead, I executed the program with the full path name, I got an out of memory error. I tried this with more than one large program with the same results. If I write a small machine code program which just exec's the larger program using the full path name, and then execute the smaller program, the larger program would run ok. This to me would seem to indicate a problem with the shell, but I suppose it could be more complicated. I called the Color Computer support group at Fort Worth, but all they could tell me was that they couldn't help me. The person I talked to tried to tell me that it was because of the memory required to hold the buffers for the directories in the path. I would be surprised if a full path name required more than one extra buffer page. Why would they open the directory for the next element in the path before they closed the last one? I tried to explain to him that it couldn't possibly require 20 extra pages, but he didn't seem to follow my reasoning. I goaded him in to promising to check on the problem for me and call me back, but of course he never did. Does Microware have a support number? Perhaps if I call Microware I might be able to talk to someone who knows what they are talking about. The small program I mentioned above is the way I use to get around the limitations of the space available on a 40 track double sided disk. I have more programs than will fit on my system disk. I have a program which generates these small programs from a template. I call it link.ex. Happily Hacking at OS-9, Brad Bosch ...!ihnp4!laidbak!brad
jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura) (09/29/85)
In article <279@sask.UUCP> mcdonald@sask.UUCP (Shane McDonald) writes: >Can someone explain this to me? I have a CoCo II running >OS9 with WordPak II installed. I compiled a long C program, >and the size of the program ended up being about 5/8 the >size of my free memory. But, when I tried to run the program, >I got an error message saying that there wasn't enough memory. >Oh, darn, I thought. That's when I discovered that the program >was only about 5/8 the size of my memory, not including, of course, >memory used for the stack. Perplexed, I decided to see if I >could load the program into memory. It loaded fine, and told >me I still had about 20K of memory left. So, I tried to run >it now. It ran fine with no memory problems. Can someone >explain why I had to load it into memory first? >-- >Shane McDonald >(ihnp4!sask!mcdonald) I don't know if you've had an answer yet, but I've noticed that ever since I started using WordPak II, with the version 3 driver kit, I've had memory de-allocation problems. Try re-booting the system and then running the program. Cheers! -- Jim O. BIX: jimomura Compuserve 72205,541 MTS at WU: GKL6 -- James Omura, Barrister & Solicitor, Toronto ihnp4!utzoo!lsuc!jimomura