Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ccut!wnoc-tyo-news!cs.titech!titccy.cc.titech!necom830!mohta
From: mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Shared libraries (was Re: Window system bashing (was Re: X11 bashing))
Message-ID: <109@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp>
Date: 16 Apr 91 11:03:18 GMT
References: <26550@adm.brl.mil> <97@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> <1991Apr15.173955.7909@athena.mit.edu> <1991Apr15.224311.3950@ida.liu.se>
Sender: news@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp
Organization: Tokyo Institute of Technology
Lines: 27

In article <1991Apr15.224311.3950@ida.liu.se>
	d89peter@odalix.ida.liu.se (Peter Eriksson) writes:

>(some discussion about windows vs text terminals deleted)

That's fine. I only want to show an alternative. I don't want to impose it
to everyone else.

>>|> Shared library is NO solution. It only moves complexity, unstability
>>|> and ineffeciency of X to UNIX.

>I would even go as far as saying that they mostly have positive side-effects.
>That way bug-fixes in the libraries can be introduced and automatically be
>in effect in all the programs that use those libraries.

If you have a rationally small environment, there will be much fewer bugs than
X-aged-several-years.

>No need to recompile
>all zillions small and big programs.

If you have a rationally small environment, you don't have zillions of small
and big programs.

I suspect shared libraries may introduce new types of security holes.

							Masataka Ohta