Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:31:06 -0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> Cc: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: libc size Message-ID: <20021030233106.32D292A896@canning.wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <20021030230723.GE42580@dan.emsphone.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dan Nelson wrote: > In the last episode (Oct 30), Doug Rabson said: > > On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Peter Wemm wrote: > > > We've been over this before. To make this work right, we need to > > > make /bin and /sbin dynamically linked. NetBSD's /rescue/* > > > approach would solve the "oops!" and other foot shooting problems. > > > > Yes please. Our root filesystem space requirements are too high, > > IMHO. > > Note that dynamically-linked executables take significantly longer to > exec than statically-linked ones. Indeed yes. Running ld-elf.so.1 isn't free. Also, calling PIC libraries isn't free either. Not only that, but even fork(2) is slower when you come *from* a dynamic executable. But for /bin/sh, then ~user etc doesn't work too well when your account exists only somewhere like ldap. Just like /bin/ls -l doesn't show the user and groups. Fortunately the costs associated with this are mostly one-off per exec and are mostly lost in the noise when the commands being run are doing real work. In the days of monsters like mozilla, kde, gnome, gcc-3.x etc, dynamic binary exec times seem to be the least of our worries. :-( Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021030233106.32D292A896>