Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!pa.dec.com!decprl!decprl!boyd
From: boyd@prl.dec.com (Boyd Roberts)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: Shared libraries are not necessary
Keywords: ISC i386 shared libraries
Message-ID: <1991May17.095801.24542@prl.dec.com>
Date: 17 May 91 09:58:01 GMT
References: <196@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> <1991May16.083123.26599@kithrup.COM> <201@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> <1991May17.053735.2123@kithrup.COM>
Sender: news@prl.dec.com (USENET News System)
Reply-To: boyd@prl.dec.com (Boyd Roberts)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Paris Research Laboratory
Lines: 25

Ahh bugger it...  Time to post...

The only reason I'd want a shared library is so I can modify a routine
and then not have to re-compile the universe.  That would be neat.

It is only in these latter days that the problem of software bloat would
persuade me that a shared library would be a good idea in an effort to save
resources.  Remove the bloat (although it's a bit late now) and I don't have
the need.

But, you still need a shared and non-shared library.  /etc/init should not
use a shared library.  Sure, you organise it so it would work with a shared
library, but the consequences of a damaged root file-system could be severe.

Implementation:  Now that's hard.  You have to think about this problem carefully
(otherwise you end up with a mess like SysVile shared libs -- pus).  It may not
be hard to implement, but you have to think about it first.  Get it wrong and
you have a (possibly non-portable) mess.

This discussion is tedious.


Boyd Roberts			boyd@prl.dec.com

``When the going gets wierd, the weird turn pro...''