Subject: Re: HEADS UP: migration to fully dynamic linked "base" system
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Bill Sommerfeld <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/27/2002 10:44:45
> I can't see any benefit to this at all. Why make NetBSD more complex when
This change *reduces* complexity; instead of having half the system
statically linked and half dynamic, everything is dynamic.
If a security patch for libc is released, you need only update libc
and /rescue; you need not run in circles rebuilding all the statically
linked binaries in /bin and /sbin and wherever else they might be
> that can only lead to less reliability?
The addition of /rescue to the system improves resiliancy compared
with the old hybrid system (since you now have two copies of init, two
copies of sh, etc.).