Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 09:04:12 +0100 From: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: libc size Message-ID: <20021031080412.GB77041@tara.freenix.org> In-Reply-To: <20021031053202.GA26280@HAL9000.homeunix.com> References: <20021030214158.CB6EA2A88D@canning.wemm.org> <20021030221417.J22480-100000@herring.nlsystems.com> <20021031053202.GA26280@HAL9000.homeunix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
According to David Schultz: > Memory is even less of an issue; if a thousand copies of a shell > are running, their text gets shared regardless of how they are > linked. IIRC not exactly. In the dynamic case, some fixups are done by the dynamic linker to "link" with the shared libs and that force the pages to be COW'd thus taking more VM. That's why static binaries are more efficient too. (someone who understand these issues please correct me if necessary) -- Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- roberto@keltia.freenix.fr FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 5.0-CURRENT #80: Sun Jun 4 22:44:19 CEST 2000 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021031080412.GB77041>