On 2 October 2012 17:54, Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net> wrote: > On 10/02/2012 06:40 PM, James wrote: >> >> Well unless they are using 1GB of RAM, I personally have not had any >> problems with 2GB or RAM. So I'd find it hard to believe it was RAM. > > > AFAICS they're not building it on local machines but on automated server > systems, possibly on cloud-based virtual servers, so they might well have > less RAM than you'd expect. > > Or, they might just have set an artificially low memory threshold on the > grounds that no package should be using this much memory just to build.
Well I pulled those figures out of my backside, I haven't actually looked that hard, but most users seem to be able to build it on their laptops (it takes a long time granted) but I doubt that many are that powerful. Still it's all 'moot' (American version) as we have no snippet log to look at. It could be a memory leak - I see for instance all those old messages show up with Mike's woodwind fingering charts. So whatever they are using is not that current. james _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
