From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Apr 26 12:01:12 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: toolchain@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1170E1065886;
	Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:01:12 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from erik@cederstrand.dk)
Received: from csmtp3.one.com (csmtp3.one.com [91.198.169.23])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C65EE8FC0A;
	Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:01:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.15] (unknown [217.157.7.221])
	by csmtp3.one.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B271724064DC;
	Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:01:08 +0000 (UTC)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk>
In-Reply-To: <20120426093548.GR2358@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 14:01:08 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DC78B021-4258-43BB-8151-C4EF96BC2D00@cederstrand.dk>
References: <20120426093548.GR2358@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
Cc: toolchain@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Un-staticise the toolchain
X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain
	<freebsd-toolchain.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-toolchain>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:01:12 -0000

Den 26/04/2012 kl. 11.35 skrev Konstantin Belousov:

> I think it is time to stop building the toolchain static. I was told =
that
> original reasoning for static linking was the fear of loosing the =
ability
> to recompile if some problem appears with rtld and any required =
dynamic
> library. Apparently, current dependencies are much more spread, e.g. =
/bin/sh
> is dynamically linked, and statically linked make does not solve =
anything.

What are the benefits, apart from using a bit less disk space overall?

Apparently, toolchain bits aren't considered important enough to be =
included in /rescue. Maybe they need to be, if the assumption currently =
is that the compiler will (almost) always work.

Erik=