From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Sep 9 17:25:23 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA00816 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 9 Sep 1996 17:25:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from po1.glue.umd.edu (po1.glue.umd.edu [129.2.128.44]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA00811 for ; Mon, 9 Sep 1996 17:25:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from modem.eng.umd.edu (modem.eng.umd.edu [129.2.98.187]) by po1.glue.umd.edu (8.8.Beta.0/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA07931; Mon, 9 Sep 1996 20:25:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost) by modem.eng.umd.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA01517; Mon, 9 Sep 1996 20:25:14 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: modem.eng.umd.edu: chuckr owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 20:25:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey X-Sender: chuckr@modem.eng.umd.edu To: Jim Durham cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NOSHARED In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 9 Sep 1996, Jim Durham wrote: > I replied to this to another person and neglected to cc: hackers. > So, let me explain. > > I was compiling a hacked copy of slattach.c. I noticed the binary > was huge and figured out that it was being linked statically. > > Being of a curious mind, I decided to investigate and found the > place in bsd.prog.mk where it was tested to control whether or not > shared libs are used. > > What bothered me at that point was why the original binary was linked > to use shared libs and the /usr/src/sbin/slattach directory's Makefile > caused slattach to be statically linked when I made it? If the binary that > came with the dist was dynamically linked, why was my new compile static? > > I then went looking for where NOSHARED was set. I figured it had > to be in /usr/src/sbin/slattach's Makefile. No dice. I even looked at > /usr/src and usr/src/sbin Makefiles. No dice. > > That is what prompted the question. Maybe it's because the distribution > was trimmed by picking and choosing what binaries to make dynamic to save > space in the distribution and the source tree just makes them all static > to simplify things? > > If so, my question remains.. where the heck is it set to YES or TRUE? > Just curious.. Makefile.inc in sbin. Causes all the binaries in sbin to be statically compiled, but I went into that in the previous mail. ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and n3lxx, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 2.2 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------