Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 15:54:27 -0600 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Subject: Re: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh Message-ID: <20031125215427.GD54467@madman.celabo.org> In-Reply-To: <200311252039.hAPKdBfq080963@apollo.backplane.com> References: <20031125025621.453732A8FC@canning.wemm.org> <200311250311.hAP3BTCO075916@apollo.backplane.com> <20031125150700.GA48007@madman.celabo.org> <200311251950.hAPJoPoo080586@apollo.backplane.com> <20031125201421.GB54467@madman.celabo.org> <200311252039.hAPKdBfq080963@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 12:39:11PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote: > My original opinion > still stands... you guys are using this issue as an excuse to basically > do away with static binaries, rather then fixing the real problem which > is an inability to dynamically load modules in a static binary. No, it is one of the issues that have been pushing FreeBSD (and most other modern UNIX systems, it seems) towards more dynamically linked components. The other issues have also been discussed on this list recently and in the pass. I'm not sure why this one draws such interest. (I participate in this thread only because I feel like I know a thing or two about the NSS details.) Cheers, -- Jacques Vidrine NTT/Verio SME FreeBSD UNIX Heimdal nectar@celabo.org jvidrine@verio.net nectar@freebsd.org nectar@kth.se
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031125215427.GD54467>