Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 18:41:43 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: "boyd, rounin" <boyd@insultant.net> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Unfortunate dynamic linking for everything Message-ID: <20031121074143.GB71152@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <050d01c3afa8$1dfb97a0$b9844051@insultant.net> References: <2147483647.1069240727@[192.168.42.6]> <20031120095214.GA68334@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <050d01c3afa8$1dfb97a0$b9844051@insultant.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 09:51:48PM +0100, boyd, rounin wrote: >From: "Peter Jeremy" <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> >> >Shouldn't that be 'chmod +t /bin/sh' ??? >> >> Definitely. Why waste a new bit when there's already a perfectly good >> one that is (or was) defined for the purpose. > >the 't' bit was known as the 'sticky' bit to keep frequently used, >sharable (judged by a human) text segments in core. since then >that bit has been overloaded to death. The purpose for setting the 't' bit was to speed up exec'ing of frequently used executables by avoiding the need to load the text segment from the filesystem. This is exactly what the suggested pre-linking achieves. As for overloading the 't' bit, I don't believe it's ever been used for anything else on executable files. I agree it grew a distinct meaning for directories but the 'x' bits have always meant different things on files and directories and the setgid bit means different things on executable and non-executable files. >shared libraries have always been a mistake. That is a matter of opinion. Shared libraries have both advantages and disadvantages. Statically linking /usr/X11R6/bin demonstrates one advantage of shared libraries. Peter
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031121074143.GB71152>