From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Nov 9 15:44:30 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3188137B4C5; Thu, 9 Nov 2000 15:44:25 -0800 (PST) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id eA9NiOP11402; Thu, 9 Nov 2000 15:44:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 15:44:24 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Mike Smith Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: The shared /bin and /sbin bikeshed Message-ID: <20001109154424.F5112@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <20001109144747.E5112@fw.wintelcom.net> <200011092257.eA9Mvq903776@mass.osd.bsdi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i In-Reply-To: <200011092257.eA9Mvq903776@mass.osd.bsdi.com>; from msmith@FreeBSD.ORG on Thu, Nov 09, 2000 at 02:57:52PM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Mike Smith [001109 14:52] wrote: > > > > The real difference here is that I've seen several instances of a > > Linux box unable to cope with this situation and a FreeBSD box > > cope. Linux locked up and FreeBSD 'gracefully' shot a process dead > > and free'd up some memory. > > > > What "should" happen versus what _did_ happen doesn't make what > > did happen untrue. > > No, but it does mean that what "did" happen for you on a Linux system is > unlikely to be representative of what will happen under similar > circumstances on a FreeBSD system, and thus your use of it as an argument > against doing this is entirely invalid. Sheesh Mike, I wasn't arguing against it, I was dissing on Linux. But still, even with shared code, the shared libraries demand: ~/src/share/man/man3 % size /usr/lib/libc.so text data bss dec hex filename 509098 15104 78200 602402 93122 /usr/lib/libc.so .(15:41:45)(bright@kyle.wintelcom.net) ~/src/share/man/man3 % size /bin/ps text data bss dec hex filename 184333 9928 37456 231717 38925 /bin/ps I may be misinterpreting this output, but it looks like if you ever mod FreeBSD to allow for disallowing of overcommit you might not have fun in low memory situations because of the BSS and DATA requirements needed for libc. (?) Anyhow, I'm not really arguing for or against, just bringing up some amusing experiances some coworkers had to deal with when using Linux and dynamic /. I really don't have much of a problem with a dynamic / since we already have /stand. Although /stand might need some new programs added to compensate, or a counterpart that gets updated as part of the installworld target. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message