Subject: Re: Dynamic libraries, bad libc and problems...
To: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Johnny Billquist <email@example.com>
Date: 10/02/2002 10:25:54
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> > *That* I would probably recommend. Then you get files installed in what
> > would probably be defined as the very wrong order. In case your tar stops
> > somewhere in the middle, you'd have a really botched system, such as /bin
> > installed, but not /libexec, or /lib.
> > You should be able to guess what happens after that.
> Uhm, why is your tar going to stop in the middle? tar tzf <file> will
> check and see if the file is ok or not, if you're that concerned.
Let me put it this way. Shit happens.
Or I'll defer to Murphy...
> Also, think about how many processes get started during untarring vs how
> many get started in the build-to-root method. For tar, it is zero (yes,
> tar gets forked, and gunzip gets forked, but that's before the untarring
> itself starts). For the build method, it's a lot. Each install is a fork,
> and there are a number of make invocations along the way. Also there could
> be a number of other programs invoked along the way too.
Yes. But then I get ld.so and libc.so.whatever installed *before* /bin/sh
> I really fail to see how an install method that does all of the library
> updates in a manner that lets us quiesce process forking/execing is less
> desirable to one that relies on a fair number of fork/execs.
Like I said. Shit happens... For me it seems to happen all the time.
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: firstname.lastname@example.org || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol