Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!uokmax!munnari.oz.au!metro!dmssyd.syd.dms.CSIRO.AU!ditsydh.syd.dit.CSIRO.AU!evans From: evans@syd.dit.CSIRO.AU (Bruce.Evans) Newsgroups: comp.os.minix Subject: Re: Message-ID: <1991May12.001703.11152@syd.dit.CSIRO.AU> Date: 12 May 91 00:17:03 GMT References: <9864@star.cs.vu.nl> <9911@star.cs.vu.nl> Organization: CSIRO Division of Info Tech, Sydney, Australia Lines: 17 In article <9911@star.cs.vu.nl> ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) writes: >executed and links to it, there is no gain. If programs do not include >the library at all in their a.out's, and somehow magically find the library >when they are executed, then I suspect this will require linking to the >entire library, not just the routines that the individual program needs. >Having the entire library in memory (even 1 copy) on a 512K original XT >is likely to be a real hog. And then there is the complexity of the whole >thing :-( It would be sufficient to put only stdio and everything it references in the shared library. Anyway my current libc.a is only 47K text for the 386 version compiled by gcc. The data space should be close to 0 once the library is made sharable (few globals). Complexity is the main problem. -- Bruce Evans evans@syd.dit.csiro.au