From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 18 18:02:20 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD21516A4CE for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:02:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from dyson.jdyson.com (dsl-static-206-246-160-137.iquest.net [206.246.160.137]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 910C543FAF for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:02:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from toor@dyson.jdyson.com) Received: from dyson.jdyson.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dyson.jdyson.com (8.12.8/8.9.3) with ESMTP id hAJ22HXQ001088; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:02:17 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from toor@dyson.jdyson.com) Received: (from toor@localhost) by dyson.jdyson.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAJ22HrQ001087; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:02:17 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200311190202.hAJ22HrQ001087@dyson.jdyson.com> In-Reply-To: <20031119015433.GN30485@roark.gnf.org> from Gordon Tetlow at "Nov 18, 2003 05:54:33 pm" To: gordont@gnf.org (Gordon Tetlow) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:02:16 -0500 (EST) From: dyson@iquest.net X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: masta@wifibsd.org cc: dyson@iquest.net cc: current@freebsd.org cc: imp@bsdimp.com Subject: Re: Unfortunate dynamic linking for everything X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: dyson@iquest.net List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 02:02:20 -0000 Gordon Tetlow said: > On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 08:03:23PM -0500, dyson@iquest.net wrote: > > > > However, PAM and NSS 'tricks' really seem to be exactly that, > > and certainly worthy of special builds. However, that isn't > > necessary, yet still not building everything with a shared > > libc. > > Things like nss_ldap (which is used *heavily* at my place of employment) > are some reasons that FreeBSD doesn't make it into more places. It was > the reason why FreeBSD isn't being used here. Calling them 'tricks' > Firstly -- I was answering back the 'tricks' comment made that you had elided :-). Please quote the message that set-up the context for the usage. > > (and succumbing to the name calling you wanted to avoid) doesn't change > the fact that every major contender (IRIX, Solaris, Linux to name a few) > all support this feature set. > As discussed before, it DEFINITELY isn't necessary to dynamically link EVERYTHING to implement your favorite feature. Not everyone needs PAM/NSS, even though everyone needs memory management and scarce resource allocation. Why build in the overhead for everyone, and make it UNNCESSARILY worse (e.g. dynamically link libc when you want NSS or PAM?) Of course, there was a development resource limitation, but the decision (discussion) was made approx 6months ago? (Enough time to solve the problem without a GLOBAL performance hit.) John