From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 16 07:50:21 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C08616A4CE for ; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 07:50:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from falcon.midgard.homeip.net (h76n3fls24o1048.bredband.comhem.se [213.67.148.76]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1C50143F93 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 07:50:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ertr1013@student.uu.se) Received: (qmail 48101 invoked by uid 1001); 16 Nov 2003 15:50:17 -0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 16:50:16 +0100 From: Erik Trulsson To: "Robert M.Zigweid" Message-ID: <20031116155016.GA47866@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> Mail-Followup-To: "Robert M.Zigweid" , Gordon Tetlow , current@FreeBSD.org References: <20031116051028.GA30485@roark.gnf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: /bin and /sbin are now dynamically linked X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 15:50:21 -0000 On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 09:46:47AM -0500, Robert M.Zigweid wrote: > > On Nov 16, 2003, at 12:10 AM, Gordon Tetlow wrote: > > >I just committed a patch to change /bin and /sbin from statically to > >dynamically linked. If you don't like the idea of using a dynamically > >linked /bin and /sbin, now is the time to define NO_DYNAMICROOT in your > >make.conf. > I'll admit to being mostly a lurker here, but isn't the point of /sbin > to be statically linked. That's what the 's' stands for? No. I think 's' is for 'system'. If you look carefully you will find that the commands in /bin and /usr/bin are those that are useful to normal users as well as sysadmins, while those in /sbin and /usr/sbin are commands that are mostly useful for the sysadmin only. > > Second question. This seems to imply that /sbin and /bin both have to > have the same behavior? They traditionally do have the same behavior, so I don't see that as a problem. > I have no problem with /bin being dynamically > linked, but what if I want /bin to be dynamic and /sbin static? Why? If you can't use the commands in /bin due to problems with dynamic linking you are unlikely to be helped by the commands in /sbin being statically linked. (For one thing you won't be able to get a shell since those normally reside in /bin.) -- Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se