From owner-freebsd-security Sat Apr 25 10:30:17 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA19534 for freebsd-security-outgoing; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 10:30:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from passer.osg.gov.bc.ca (0@passer.osg.gov.bc.ca [142.32.110.29]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA19477 for ; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 10:29:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cy@cschuber.net.gov.bc.ca) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by passer.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.8.8/8.6.10) id KAA11612; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 10:29:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cschuber.net.gov.bc.ca(142.31.240.113), claiming to be "cwsys.cwsent.com" via SMTP by passer.osg.gov.bc.ca, id smtpdaallca; Sat Apr 25 10:29:37 1998 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by cwsys.cwsent.com (8.8.8/8.6.10) id KAA05173; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 10:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199804251729.KAA05173@cwsys.cwsent.com> Received: from localhost.cwsent.com(127.0.0.1), claiming to be "cwsys" via SMTP by localhost.cwsent.com, id smtpd005165; Sat Apr 25 10:29:02 1998 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.1 12/23/97 Reply-to: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group X-Sender: cy To: "John S. Dyson" cc: peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au (Peter Jeremy), freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Static vs. dynamic linking In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 23 Apr 1998 01:58:31 CDT." <199804230658.BAA08577@dyson.iquest.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 10:29:01 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > How many of our problems can be fixed in the library(s) alone, > anyway? Let me rephrase the question and answer that question: Can problems be fixed using shared libraries alone? I use a commercial X product. I've found some bugs (mainly zombies) that the vendor doesn't want to fix via patches to this release. Since the product was released using shared binaries, I replaced some system calls that they call by using LD_PRELOAD and LD_LIBRARY_PATH. If the product had been shipped using static binaries or if the O/S (in this case FreeBSD) did not support shared libraries, I'd be stuck (or the job of creating a fix would have been much more difficult). So in this case the answer is yes. The current arrangement as we have it, some binaries linked dynamic and others linked static, is a fairly good arrangement. Can this arrangement be adjusted or improved? Yes. The two extremes however: To totally switch to shared libraries (would cause a performance hit) or to no longer support shared libraries (not mentioned in this discussion yet but I'm sure some are thinking about this) [both] appear silly and I'm sure a good compromise (adjustments and tuning) can be found. Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437 Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766 Open Systems Group Internet: cschuber@uumail.gov.bc.ca ITSD Cy.Schubert@gems8.gov.bc.ca Government of BC To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message