From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Aug 13 14:17:45 1995 Return-Path: questions-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id OAA04775 for questions-outgoing; Sun, 13 Aug 1995 14:17:45 -0700 Received: from jolt.eng.umd.edu (jolt.eng.umd.edu [129.2.102.5]) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id OAA04768 for ; Sun, 13 Aug 1995 14:17:40 -0700 Received: from latte.eng.umd.edu (latte.eng.umd.edu [129.2.98.15]) by jolt.eng.umd.edu (8.6.10/8.6.4) with ESMTP id RAA08225; Sun, 13 Aug 1995 17:03:10 -0400 Received: (chuckr@localhost) by latte.eng.umd.edu (8.6.10/8.6.4) id RAA05026; Sun, 13 Aug 1995 17:17:28 -0400 Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 17:17:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey To: Jim Howard cc: Faried Nawaz , freebsd-questions@freefall.FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: gnumalloc In-Reply-To: <199508132034.AA12800@diamond.sierra.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: questions-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sun, 13 Aug 1995, Jim Howard wrote: > > how did you compile things in /bin and /sbin with shared libraries? is > > your /usr/lib in the same partition as / ? or did you do something with > > ldconfig and ld.so? i'm curious because i've never tried it, but wanted > > to... > > Gee, clever me, it just sank in on me what the point about partitions > was. I installed everything on one partation, because I've only got > one drive, and that made sense to me. If the /usr tree were on a > separate partition you'd have an impossible time, because init (and > several other programs) are running well before a separate /usr > partition gets mounted! It's an issue I never faced. > > I suppose servers ALWAYS have /usr on a separate partition, which > makes another reason (in addition to performance) why shared > libraries for /bin and /sbin MIGHT not be a good idea for servers. > > This is yet another example of how in the U*IX world, the desktop > user's logic isn't always compatible with the site administrator's > logic. > I don't think you have the whole story, and I believe you might possibly be wrong about this administrator versus user mindset. One of the big reasons why you want stuff in the root partition to be statically linked is so that, in the situation where you've blown away something drastic in /usr, and can't mount it (and all of your shared libs), the tools that exist to allow you to (possibly) fix this still work. If everything is made dynamically linked, and you lose your libs, you're dead. If fact, I don't think you can even update your libs easily, because when you move them, every tool you have will die. ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- 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 (Freebsd 2.0.5-snap-0726) and (301) 220-2114 | n3lxx (FreeBSD 2.0.5-snap-0622) -- Great! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------