From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Nov 24 19:28:08 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 791B416A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:28:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.mho.com (smtp.mho.net [64.58.4.6])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A3A6F43FDF
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:28:06 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org)
Received: (qmail 56874 invoked by uid 1002); 25 Nov 2003 03:28:06 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.4.1.5?) (64.58.1.252)
  by smtp.mho.net with SMTP; 25 Nov 2003 03:28:06 -0000
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 20:31:04 -0700 (MST)
From: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org>
X-X-Sender: scottl@pooker.samsco.home
To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
In-Reply-To: <200311250321.hAP3L5dh076036@apollo.backplane.com>
Message-ID: <20031124203005.Y69870@pooker.samsco.home>
References: <200311250214.hAP2EctT019845@realtime.exit.com>
	<200311250321.hAP3L5dh076036@apollo.backplane.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
cc: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 03:28:08 -0000

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> :I supported the decision because:
> :
> :1.  It has been requested for years
> :2.  It benefits PAM and NSS.
> :3.  It is easy to revert.
>
>     Easy to revert?  You are talking about depending on mechanisms for
>     authentication and other things that WILL NOT WORK with static binaries
>     as they currently stand and, apparently, will not work in the
>     future either.  Easy to revert?  I don't think so.
>
>     More like "Lets do away with support for static binaries entirely".
>     Because that is precisely what is happening here.

What the hell are you talking about????