Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 01:34:41 -0000 From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: Frank Mayhar <frank@exit.com> Cc: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> Subject: Re: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh Message-ID: <20031125013430.GA62414@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <200311250106.hAP16qNp018512@realtime.exit.com> References: <200311251049.18227.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <200311250106.hAP16qNp018512@realtime.exit.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 05:06:52PM -0800, Frank Mayhar wrote: > Daniel O'Connor wrote: > > What _REAL WORLD_ task does this slow down? > > I think the point was that, in this particular "worst" case, it's a forty > percent performance hit. What's the average case? What's the case for a > "real world" pipeline with a lot of tiny little static binaries? > > I dislike this decision enough that I'm actually considering going away > from FreeBSD, something I really had never for a moment thought possible. > (snip) >> >> If it is for you then just build your world with static root. > > Kind of defeats the purpose, don't you think? > Let's see. You dislike the dynamic root decision enough that you are considering the abandonment of FreeBSD. Then when you're told that you can still build a static root if you need/want it, you make a sarcastic remark. Would you some ice cream while you eat your cake? -- Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031125013430.GA62414>