From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 07:58:03 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 B333A16A4CF; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:58:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from duke.cs.duke.edu (duke.cs.duke.edu [152.3.140.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE82443FE1; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:58:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) Received: from grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (grasshopper.cs.duke.edu [152.3.145.30]) by duke.cs.duke.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hAPFw15g004321 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:58:01 -0500 (EST) Received: (from gallatin@localhost) by grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (8.11.6/8.9.1) id hAPFvuV20780; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:57:56 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) From: Andrew Gallatin MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16323.31748.84583.971494@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:57:56 -0500 (EST) To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" In-Reply-To: <20031125151939.GB48007@madman.celabo.org> References: <16322.46449.554372.358751@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20031124.190904.127666948.imp@bsdimp.com> <16322.47726.903593.393976@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20031124.191931.67791612.imp@bsdimp.com> <16322.50980.825349.898362@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20031125151939.GB48007@madman.celabo.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 12) "Channel Islands" XEmacs Lucid 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 15:58:03 -0000 Jacques A. Vidrine writes: > > So can we just have a statically linked /bin/sh and get on with life? That certainly seems like the best compromise. Then we can end this thread ;) > That seems to have the most impact. We can also expend our efforts > to improve dynamic linking performance, since that will improve the > performance of the other 99.9% of the universe. > What happened to mdodd's prebinding efforts? Drew