Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!hybrid!scifi!bywater!uunet!kithrup!sef
From: sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan)
Subject: Re: Shared libraries are not necessary
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
Date: Thu, 23 May 1991 08:45:55 GMT
Message-ID: <1991May23.084555.5173@kithrup.COM>
Keywords: ISC i386 shared libraries
References: <211@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> <1991May21.055103.25680@Think.COM> <226@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp>

In article <226@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta) writes:
>>How many standard C and Unix library functions have had changes to their
>>interface?
>Many.

Name 20 out of more-or-less generic-unix libc.

>For shared libraries be applicable, it must have stayed exactly constant.

No, that's why you have "version numbers" in your shared library, a la SunOS
et al.  (Not knowing multics, I can't comment on what it did.)

>You should have said it with supporting facts.

Any facts any of us have posted you have dismissed as irrelevent, useless
for anybody but dweebs, or outright wrong, despite supporting evidence.

>So what? What was discussed is how shared libraries is not useful for the
>change from /etc/hosts to DNS in the real world.

Gee, I think that dozens/hundreds/thousands of Sun machines count as "the
real world."

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "I made the universe, but please don't blame me for it;
sef@kithrup.COM  |  I had a bellyache at the time."
-----------------+           -- The Turtle (Stephen King, _It_)
Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.