Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wuarchive!uunet!auspex!guy
From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: Shared Lib Question (ISC)
Keywords: ISC i386 shared libraries
Message-ID: <7690@auspex.auspex.com>
Date: 8 May 91 17:43:25 GMT
References: <276@rwing.UUCP> <162@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp>
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Lines: 26

>>I have noticed with interest the discussion going on regarding shared
>>libraries.  However, what is obvious is that there are several kinds
>>of shared libaries, all using some different scheme to operate.
>
>It proves that the concept of shared libraries is not so simple.

Only to people who, for whatever mysterious reason, thought that:

	1) there was only one way that every OS in the universe uses to
	   implement shared libraries;

or

	2) every UNIX system in creation that provides some
	   functionality does so in the same fashion.

Anybody who believed neither 1) nor 2) already knew that the concept
wasn't "so simple" that they could assume that every system in the
universe did shared libraries the same way.  Anybody who believed 2)
hasn't seen very many UNIX systems; anybody who believed 1) hasn't seen
many OSes, or hasn't noticed that, in fact, different OSes provide
*lots* of different functions - not just shared libraries - in different
fashions. 

I.e., it's not an argument of any sort against shared libraries, if
that's what you had in mind....