Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 12:10:03 -0400 (EDT) From: woods@zeus.leitch.com (Greg A. Woods) To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Static vs. dynamic linking (was Re: Using MD5 insted of DES ...) Message-ID: <199804221610.MAA01179@brain.zeus.leitch.com> In-Reply-To: Poul-Henning Kamp's message of "Wed, April 22, 1998 08:35:07 %2B0200" regarding "Re: Static vs. dynamic linking (was Re: Using MD5 insted of DES ...) " id <2234.893226907@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <199804220616.AAA02036@mt.sri.com> <2234.893226907@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ On Wed, April 22, 1998 at 08:35:07 (+0200), Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: ] > Subject: Re: Static vs. dynamic linking (was Re: Using MD5 insted of DES ...) > > I disagree, I think just the crypt problem is sufficient argument to > go dynamic. I think if the interface is done in such a way that a run-time flag chooses the appropriate mechanism then from an implementation point of view it is irrelevant whether dynamic linking is used to save a bit of memory by not loading the unused schemes (or indeed to avoid having to have them all present on a given system), or not. In either case the programming and administrative interfaces are the same. The only difference is in resource utilization and overall administrative restrictions (e.g. someone may not be permitted to have libdes.so, and dynamic linking will allow that to be an option chosen during a binary-only install). -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 443-1734 VE3TCP <gwoods@acm.org> <robohack!woods> Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199804221610.MAA01179>