From owner-freebsd-current Sun Dec 22 07:59:24 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id HAA08649 for current-outgoing; Sun, 22 Dec 1996 07:59:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from veda.is (adam@ubiq.veda.is [193.4.230.60]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id HAA08637 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 1996 07:59:17 -0800 (PST) Received: (from adam@localhost) by veda.is (8.8.4/8.7.3) id QAA21531; Sun, 22 Dec 1996 16:04:34 GMT Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 16:04:34 GMT From: Adam David Message-Id: <199612221604.QAA21531@veda.is> To: wpaul@skynet.ctr.columbia.EDU (Bill Paul) Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Plan for integrating Secure RPC -- comments wanted Newsgroups: list.freebsd.current References: <199612152152.OAA24022@phaeton.artisoft.com> <199612152351.SAA05656@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu> X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #2 (NOV) Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Terry: >> Is there a reason you have not considered just taking the step of >> linking these programs shared (option 4?)? This would resolve all >> of the problems simply and effectively. Bill: >Yes: I _like_ the fact that /bin and /sbin are linked static (/bin >mostly). The commands there keep working in the face of a corrupted >or deleted libc.so. I'm not in a hurry to change this. >> I believe the reasons for not running with a shared world are now >> largely irrelevant: the shared library dirty page library clobber >> bug seems to have died more than a year ago, and there is no real >> good reason for it. >That depends on your opinion. Again, I like having some purely static >binaries around to help deal in a shared lib crisis. Also, consider >fsck, which needs to be run on /usr (if /usr is not on the rootfs) >before /usr is mounted. We would have to move libc.so to the rootfs >in order for fsck to work if it was linked dynamic. Put static executables in /bin and /sbin, but mount directories of dynamic executables over them at a later stage. This offers the possibility of conserving memory at the expense of a little more disk space. The static copies could even be accessed later on via an alternative path if necessary. -- Adam David