From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Aug 27 17:11:13 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA19785 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 17:11:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.local.sunyit.edu (A-T34.rh.sunyit.edu [150.156.210.241]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19780 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 17:11:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (perlsta@localhost) by server.local.sunyit.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA27462 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 20:16:16 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: server.local.sunyit.edu: perlsta owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 20:16:16 +0000 (GMT) From: Alfred Perlstein X-Sender: perlsta@server.local.sunyit.edu To: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: shared libraries? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk This is a strange question/idea, Why is the standard C library like the code in string.h, stdio.h ect. in shared libraries? if need be, the programer could change his code and make a new library. If most of the libraries were converted to a shared lib format wouldn't that reduce memory and disk space requirements tremendously? not only that, but complile times and exec times would soar, woudn't they? you'll have to forgive me if this sounds niave, but i think it's a good idea. ._________________________________________ __ _ |Alfred Perlstein - Programming & SysAdmin for hire... |perlsta@sunyit.edu |http://www.cs.sunyit.edu/~perlsta : ---"Have you seen my FreeBSD tatoo?" ' ---"who was that masked admin?"