Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 21:11:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu> To: Alfred Perlstein <perlsta@sunyit.edu> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: shared libraries? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970827210740.302E-100000@Journey2.mat.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970827201206.27457A-100000@server.local.sunyit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 27 Aug 1997, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > 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. Are you taking painkillers or something? I can't tell what your post is trying to say. your 2nd sentence asks why stuff is in shared libs, your 4th asks why they don't get converted to shared like (why should it need converting if it's already that way?) and overall, I can't tell if you're aguing for or against them. On top of that, have you taken a look at /usr/lib, and noticed that they're BOTH ways? What are you trying to ask here? ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and picnic, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 3.0 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970827210740.302E-100000>