Subject: Re: HEADS UP: migration to fully dynamic linked "base" system
To: Bill Studenmund <email@example.com>
From: Greywolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/26/2002 10:30:00
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Bill Studenmund wrote:
# Please read the thread on tech-userlevel. There are a lot of good reasons
# for doing this, all of which involve now being able to dlopen() libraries.
Begging pardon, folks, but I've noted that the pattern of implementation
for things like this seems to be:
- someone thinks it's a good idea.
- A discussion gets underway and beaten to death, with no clear decision
- The discussion dies off since nobody can come up with anything new to
contribute to it.
- The ensuing length of silence is mistaken for consent.
- The good idea gets implemented, and when objections are re-raised,
the objectors are instructed to see the archives.
This is kind of how /etc/rc.d came into being, and although I don't disagree
with its objective, I'm not terribly fond of the method by which it was
I still think that only /sbin/init is going to really require this change,
and there needs to be a keyword ("traditional"? "static-root"?) such that
we can continue to build root static and /usr dynamic if we want to.
NetBSD: a server in every port.