Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 17:47:14 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: ache@astral.msk.su (=?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?=), freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ld.so, LD_NOSTD_PATH, and suid/sgid programs Message-ID: <199510242347.RAA27093@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <199510242313.QAA14454@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <mcNbKZmCm3@ache.dialup.demos.ru> <199510242313.QAA14454@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert writes: > > >As it currently sits, it's not harmful, and it represents a direction > > >that is desirable. > > > > Since it isn't implemented correctly, it just increase startup time, > > let's wait until author implement it properly (in Sun style). If > > proper implementation never happens, we don't need to keep it too. > > #ifdef? Since the run-time loader code affects the memory size of *every* single binary in the system, removing un-necessary/un-needed functionality from it is a win. We still have the CVS tree which we can use to pull out the code from if we need it at a later date. This does assume one has access to the CVS tree, but given the extreme interest that has been shown in the code up till this point I'd be very suprised to get a sudden rash of volunteers wanting to implement LD_NOSTD_PATH but they don't have enough code to work with. :) Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199510242347.RAA27093>