From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 3 05:22:27 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC0037B401 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 05:22:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2871443F85 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 05:22:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mtm@identd.net) Received: from kokeb.ambesa.net ([138.88.0.86]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.33 201-253-122-126-133-20030313) with ESMTP id <20030603122226.BGPM11703.pop018.verizon.net@kokeb.ambesa.net>; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 07:22:26 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 08:22:25 -0400 From: Mike Makonnen To: Andrew Gallatin In-Reply-To: <16092.36129.388194.477452@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> References: <20030603113927.I71313@cvs.imp.ch> <16092.35144.948752.554975@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20030603115432.EGLB13328.out002.verizon.net@kokeb.ambesa.net> <16092.36129.388194.477452@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.10 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at pop018.verizon.net from [138.88.0.86] at Tue, 3 Jun 2003 07:22:26 -0500 Message-Id: <20030603122226.BGPM11703.pop018.verizon.net@kokeb.ambesa.net> cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Making a dynamically-linked root X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 12:22:28 -0000 On Tue, 3 Jun 2003 07:57:21 -0400 (EDT) Andrew Gallatin wrote: > > Ok, maybe a webserver is a bad example. But you must admit that > /bin/sh is commonly used outside the startup scripts. Yes, I agree. But... So far I think the arguments against it are two-fold: 1. Performance 2. What happens if I hose one of the libraries? I think Gordon has already answered them adequately: 1. If you don't want it, turn it off 2. there will be a statically linked /rescue to pull your bacon out of the fire. I think for _most_ situations, including the boot scripts, the extra added time is negligible. In the boot scripts some of that added time can be recuperated in other ways (look at the patch I post earlier in the thread). But most importantly, I think people are forgetting that this is going to be *optional*. If you don't want to use it, don't. In many ways this boils down to the age-old bikeshed of "do we want to keep moving into the future or stay tied to the past because we don't want to lose a single bit of performance on that old 386 with 8MB ram we have lying around." For those of us who can't get our companies/clients to use FreeBSD because it can't be integrated into their network this feature is fantastic. For those of us who would rather stay with something that works for us and we're happy with, we can chose not to enable it. Cheers. -- Mike Makonnen | GPG-KEY: http://www.identd.net/~mtm/mtm.asc mtm@identd.net | D228 1A6F C64E 120A A1C9 A3AA DAE1 E2AF DBCC 68B9 mtm@FreeBSD.Org| FreeBSD - The Power To Serve