shahn@hstbme.mit.edu (Samuel Hahn) (05/03/90)
Two questions/comments on the above subjects: 1) System 6.0.5: I have read some bad things about 6.0.5 in comp.sys.mac.* and I am now beginning to wonder if installing it was a bad idea. People have been griping about it, but no one seems to post a specific problem like 6.0.5 crashes z program when I try to do x. Does anyone have any concrete proof that 6.0.5 is a turkey? 2) System Heap...this whole thing about the System Heap has got me confused. I thought most (if not all) of the memory allocation was dynamic and that the heap grew and shrank as needed. For instance, if you open a bunch of DAs or run PrintMonitor and do a "About Finder" the memory dedicated to the System grows appreciably. If this is true, why bother setting the system heap to a predefined limit? What am I missing here?
chuq@Apple.COM (The Bounty Hunter) (05/03/90)
shahn@hstbme.mit.edu (Samuel Hahn) writes: >1) System 6.0.5: I have read some bad things about 6.0.5 in comp.sys.mac.* I know of one serious bug report on 6.0.5. 24 hours later the person who filed it rescinded it after finding the bug in his program. It wasn't in 6.0.5 at all. The only thing I've seen that's a problem is that the ADB code changed in 6.0.5 to conform to TechNote 206. This has caused some problems with some revisions of some ADB devices (trackballs, for instance). I've been running 6.0.5 myself and beating the h*ck out of it for a while. I've seen absolutely no problems that I didn't have with 6.0.4 (and those were because I've got about a meg of stuff in my system heap and they don't always like each other in there). With the exception of the compatibility issues I've mentioned on ADB, everything I've seen about 6.0.5 has either been very general, third-hand or unsubstantiated. My personal experience has been positive. >2) System Heap...this whole thing about the System Heap has got me confused. >I thought most (if not all) of the memory allocation was dynamic and that the >heap grew and shrank as needed. It *is* dynamic if there is space available to grow. It is possible to get into situations where you can't grow the system heap, and stuff in the system heap generally isn't graceful in out of memory conditions -- so you do what you need to do to avoid the condition. -- Chuq Von Rospach <+> chuq@apple.com <+> [This is myself speaking] I regret to announce that--though, as I said, eleventy-one years is far too short a time to spend among you--this is the end. I am going. Good-bye. -- Bilbo
grobbins@pohl.cis.upenn.edu (Grobbins) (05/03/90)
In article <40701@apple.Apple.COM> chuq@Apple.COM writes: >I've been running 6.0.5 myself and beating the h*ck out of it for a while. >I've seen absolutely no problems that I didn't have with 6.0.4 I've had many, many crashes when app-hopping under 6.0.5 which weren't repeatable enough to file a bug report, but which did not occur under 6.0.4. Applications also quit spontaneously, and other strange happenings occur. I'm now in the habit of saving before switching out of an application under 6.0.5. Wingz 1.1 won't launch a second time under 6.0.5; according to an earlier post, the programmer knows the bug. (That hurts; I'm doing large neural net simulations in Wingz, and have to leave it frequently. Restarting the Mac to restart the program is annoying.) Unless you need one of the 6.0.5 bug fixes, I'd say stick with 6.0.4. (Yeah, Chuq, this is too general to be useful, but it is my experience. You couldn't pay me to track down system software bugs again.) The system seems more sensitive to full memory; I've had to increase the heap substantially, which I had never done before. And in the process of typing this, I hit another problem, a hang when choosing About the Finder, which has happened before under 6.0.5. Living on the edge, Grobbins. grobbins@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
Leo.Bores@f14.n114.z1.fidonet.org (Leo Bores) (05/08/90)
In an article of <3 May 90 03:29:03 GMT>, shahn@hstbme.mit.edu (Samuel Hahn)
writes:
SH>Two questions/comments on the above subjects:
SH>
SH>2) System Heap...this whole thing about the System Heap has got me
SH>confused.
SH>I thought most (if not all) of the memory allocation was dynamic and
SH>that the
SH>heap grew and shrank as needed. For instance, if you open a bunch of
SH>DAs
SH>or run PrintMonitor and do a "About Finder" the memory dedicated to the
SH>System grows appreciably. If this is true, why bother setting the
SH>system
SH>heap to a predefined limit? What am I missing here?
Not all DAs/INITs have the syz resource which allows such allocation and even
if they do, most of these are "quick and dirty" routines that often do not exit
correctly, leaving the heap fragmented and in a mess.
Leo Bores, M.D.
--
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!asuvax!stjhmc!14!Leo.Bores
Internet: Leo.Bores@f14.n114.z1.fidonet.org