paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) (05/01/89)
If anybody is trying to generate large libraries with Lattice's oml, forget it. I was trying to debug a large graphics library that is around 230K in size without the debug info. With the debug info it would be substantially larger. I don't know how much since oml fails with a "library too large" error at around 250K. I called their tech support and was told "too bad, break it up in smaller libraries". Obviously this is not the right answer. This makes it impossible to generate large libraries (like GKS) with Lattice. I guess I'll have to do it with Manx. I know that their librarian does not crap out. -- -+= SAM =+- "the best things in life are free" ARPA: paolucci@snll-arpagw.llnl.gov
usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner) (05/02/89)
In article <108@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes:
->Obviously this is not the right answer. This makes it impossible to
->generate large libraries (like GKS) with Lattice. I guess I'll have
->to do it with Manx. I know that their librarian does not crap out.
Aren't libraries just JOIN'ed #?.o files?
If so, you could use OML to manage your library cut in half, and
then when you want a whole library, just JOIN them together.riley@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Daniel S. Riley) (05/03/89)
In article <2802@cps3xx.UUCP> porkka@frith.UUCP (Joseph A Porkka) writes: >In article <108@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: >->Obviously this is not the right answer. This makes it impossible to >->generate large libraries (like GKS) with Lattice. I guess I'll have >->to do it with Manx. I know that their librarian does not crap out. >Aren't libraries just JOIN'ed #?.o files? Originally, they were just joined .o files, but that requires that the linker read through most of the library during scanning, which is slow. So Lattice added an index hunk at the end of the library, which oml maintains. blink will still accept the old style libraries, but joining two new style libraries will not work, and one old style library that big would be mucho slow. It might be possible to write a little program to merge two libraries without going through oml, but that sort of tomfoolery shouldn't be necessary. If this really is a built in limitation to oml and not an out-of-memory problem, Lattice needs to get their act together and fix it. -Dan Riley (riley@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu, cornell!batcomputer!riley) -Wilson Lab, Cornell U.
dale@boing.UUCP (Dale Luck) (05/03/89)
In article <108@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes:
=If anybody is trying to generate large libraries with Lattice's oml,
=forget it. I was trying to debug a large graphics library that is
=around 230K in size without the debug info. With the debug info it
=would be substantially larger. I don't know how much since oml fails
=with a "library too large" error at around 250K. I called their tech
=support and was told "too bad, break it up in smaller libraries".
=Obviously this is not the right answer. This makes it impossible to
=generate large libraries (like GKS) with Lattice. I guess I'll have
=to do it with Manx. I know that their librarian does not crap out.
=
Your right, this answer is BULL. We talked to John Toebes, and he said
to just join all the files together. That's how the amiga.lib is made.
When we tried oml, it blew out at less than 32k or so.
The X lib that we are trying to put together weighs in at 221k(greenhills)
without any debug stuff.
We have not tried the "join" suggestion, but we will keep you informed.
--
Dale Luck GfxBase/Boing, Inc.
{uunet!cbmvax|pyramid}!amiga!boing!dale