Re: Making a dynamically-linked root

From: Gordon Tetlow (gordont_at_gnf.org)
Date: 06/03/03

  • Next message: Marcel Moolenaar: "Re: Making a dynamically-linked root" 
    Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 15:58:07 -0700
To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>

    On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 03:47:34PM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
    > On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 02:49:56PM -0700, Gordon Tetlow wrote:
    > >
    > > Actually, it was a diskless boot, so it was in the system cache. =) I
    > > know this is a rigged demo, but the point is the same, yes, it's slower,
    > > but we also have a huge gain from going to a dynamically linked world.
    > > It would also serve as encouragement to get things like pre-binding and
    > > caching working.
    >
    > Please do not rectify or relativate the performance loss of a 100%
    > shared world by hinting towards pre-binding and/or caching. If the
    > success of a 100% shared world depends on prebinding, then I suggest
    > we abandon the attempt right here, right now. I don't think it is
    > realized how big a wormhole prebinding really is.

    I'm not saying we need either solution for a shared world to work.
    I was trying to say that if people think that a shared world is
    slow that it might cause someone to do something clever and get
    pre-binding or the like working. Again, it's not strictly needed.

    > I support a 100% shared world, but we should not abandon staticly
    > linked /bin and /sbin. Let's just create the mechanics to allow
    > one to choose for whatever reason one might have to choose one way
    > or the other and let's make sure that we nailed it completely. I
    > don't want to see any entries in UPDATING to overcome switching
    > from one to the other or to describe the steps required to do a
    > trivial source upgrade.

    My hope is to do just that and make it as painless as possible to
    switch. It's non-trivial and considering the easy with which foot-
    shooting can commence, I hestiate to ask people to touch any of my
    patches.

    > I suggest we get the functionality in without actually changing the
    > default. We can change the default anytime after that when we are
    > confident that we covered everything and have understanding of the
    > overall impact of switching...

    I'm trying to provide options. I'm encouraging a dynamic world (and
    think it's the correct solution for 5.2, esp if we are going to be
    touting our NSS support).

    -gordon

  • Next message: Marcel Moolenaar: "Re: Making a dynamically-linked root"