From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 17 13:13:24 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C6E437B404 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:13:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from magic.adaptec.com (magic-mail.adaptec.com [208.236.45.100]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0327843FCB for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:13:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scott_long@btc.adaptec.com) Received: from redfish.adaptec.com (redfish.adaptec.com [162.62.50.11]) by magic.adaptec.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3HKB3Z12221; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:11:03 -0700 Received: from btc.btc.adaptec.com ([10.100.0.52]) by redfish.adaptec.com (8.8.8p2+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA09852; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:13:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from btc.adaptec.com (hollin [10.100.253.56]) by btc.btc.adaptec.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA07146; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:13:06 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <3E9F0A28.8030906@btc.adaptec.com> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:10:16 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030414 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Polstra References: <20030417141133.GA4155@madman.celabo.org> <20030417144449.GA4530@madman.celabo.org> <200304171535.h3HFZEFs094589@strings.polstra.com> <20030418014500.B94094@iclub.nsu.ru> <200304171944.h3HJi1jK095151@strings.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <200304171944.h3HJi1jK095151@strings.polstra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: new NSS X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 20:13:24 -0000 John Polstra wrote: > In article <20030418014500.B94094@iclub.nsu.ru>, > Max Khon wrote: > >>On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 08:35:14AM -0700, John Polstra wrote: >> >> >>>You might want to look at how libpam handles this situation. In the >>>static case, all of the known modules are linked into it statically. >>>Then they are located and registered at runtime by means of a linker >>>set. >> >>statically linking pam_ldap to /bin/ls will be a nightmare :) > > > True, but why would /bin/ls need anything from PAM at all? It > doesn't currently use PAM. > > >>we need either allow dlopen(3) to be used in statically linked programs >>or move to dynamically linked /. > > > Moving to a fully dynamically linked system sounds easier to me. > But in the past there has been strong opposition to the idea every > time it has been proposed. > > John Right, because everyone is deathly afraid of /usr/lib not being available and nothing working, or ld.so getting corrupt and nothing working, or beagles falling from the sky and nothing working. FreeBSD is one of the few Unix-like OS's left that isn't fully dynamically linked. If switching to a fully dynamically linked system is desired before 6.0 then it needs to happen before 5.2. I'm not opposed to this. Scott