Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!retix!jay From: jay@retix.retix.com (Jay Logue) Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals Subject: Re: Shared libraries are not necessary Keywords: ISC i386 shared libraries Message-ID: <1991May23.192743.23465@retix.retix.com> Date: 23 May 91 19:27:43 GMT References: <202@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> <1991May17.075555.29787@Think.COM> <211@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> Organization: Retix, Santa Monica CA Lines: 85 In article <211@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta) writes: >In article <1991May17.075555.29787@Think.COM> barmar@think.com writes: > >>There are two kinds of software upgrades: those which change the interface >>to the library, and those which only change the implementation. > >>Most of the common shared library designs only make the second kind simple. >>That's certainly better than nothing. > >And, my claim is that the second kind is almost nothing. > >Your (those who support shared libraries) example of DNS prove that. > >Most software upgrade is a little more complex than can be processed by >mere library change. > > Masataka Ohta I have been following this (lively?) thread for a while, but given the statements above, perhaps I've missed something along the way. You seem to be saying that the ability to upgrade a program or set of programs without recompilation by replacing a common shared library is of no value, and does not in itself or coupled with any other ability justify the use of shared libraries. You cite the previous discussion about DNS as a proof of this assertion. However, this proof provides the DNS example as its only argument, whereas your assertion of the value of shared libraries applies to all possible shared library uses. Are you also stating that the DNS example is universal for all uses of shared libraries for the purposes of software maintainance/configuration? That it is the only possible scenario for the use of shared libraries? Do you mean to say that someone could not (and has not) come up with a use of shared libraries that is in some way valuable to themselves and their customers? If this is the case, I challange you to prove it. If this is not the case, then I can see nothing that supports your conclusion. As for myself, I believe that your argument is far too narrow to invalidate the value of shared libraries. Furthermore, I believe that the use of shared libraries for the purposes we are discussing is very valuable and will become even more so in the future. It is very easy to imagine two applications developed by seperate companies that co-operate using a shared library interface module that is coded and _maintained_ by a third company. The maintainance relationship would exist between the end-user and the third company directly and, indeed, the two applications development compaines need not even be aware that their applications co-operation let alone aware of the fact that the code with which they co-operate is the subject of periodic updates. I believe this sort of relationship exists right now within the OS/2 environment (with Microsoft being the third company). As a final note, I would ask you to be a little less confrontational in your reply than you have been in previous replies. In posting this message, my intention is to promote a discussion which has, at least up to this point, been very educational for me. I am not interested in receiving a reply littered with rude remarks or personal attacks. Jay Logue =============================================================================== INGREDIENTS: Jay Logue's personal opinions, cute signature, physical/electronic addresses, and one or more of the following used as a filler: assorted quotations, extraneous punctuation, white-space. CONTAINS NO OFFICIAL EMPLOYER OPINIONS OR POSITIONS. Not to be taken internally. If accidentally injested, flush with generous quantities of Jose Quervo Gold and consult your nearest bartender immediately. =============================================================================== Retix USMail: 2644 30th Street, Santa Monica, CA 90405-3009 U.S.A Tel: (213) 399-1611 Fax: (213) 458-2685 Telex: 4944307 E-mail: jay@retix.com X.400: C=US;ADMD=TELEMAIL;PRMD=RETIX;O=OSI ONE;S=LOGUE;G=JAY ===============================================================================