From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 10 19:39:09 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 884BA16A417; Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:39:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7236613C457; Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:39:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id AD4FC1A4D7C; Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:38:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:38:29 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Robert Watson , Brooks Davis , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Message-ID: <20071210193829.GI61429@elvis.mu.org> References: <20071128211022.GA74762@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <20071128213947.Q7555@fledge.watson.org> <20071210192533.GA15728@VARK.MIT.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071210192533.GA15728@VARK.MIT.EDU> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Subject: Re: RFC: libkse*.a in 7.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:39:09 -0000 * David Schultz [071210 11:36] wrote: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2007, Robert Watson wrote: > > It's worth noting that some other mainstream operating systems work hard to > > disallow static linking for precisely this sort of reason -- when I last > > checked, Mac OS X had only one statically linked binary, init, and it may > > well be that launchd is dynamically linked. This is part of a very > > explicit policy that the defined ABI for applications is *not* the system > > call layer, but rather, the library interfaces, which gives greater > > flexibility to modify the system call interface as needed. > > Solaris has done this for well over a decade, and as a > consequence, they have a stable ABI without adding a bunch of > compat garbage to the kernel. It's mostly done via symbol > versioning in libc and other libraries. Yup. > > Note that it's possible to *provide* static libraries without > *supporting* them. People can link their apps statically if they > so desire, with the understanding that they will need to recompile > when they upgrade to the next major release of FreeBSD. This is a very good point. It's very typical for vendors to statically link things though because of cluelessness over shared libs, we should discourage, _without overly penalizing_, them if they attempt to do so. > Apologies for replying to an old thread. I'm catching up on my email! Well, your comments are still insightful... :) -- - Alfred Perlstein