Subject: Re: why /bin and /sbin static
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/18/2001 13:39:51
[ On Sunday, March 18, 2001 at 12:58:48 (+0100), email@example.com wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: why /bin and /sbin static
> > Disk space saving is obvious. The other points are more subtle and I would
> > not bet on any overall figure without good measurements.
> because more code are shared there is less code in memory=better work on
> less memory.
> please count just size of very-often-used programs - sh, mv, ls,
> init, etc...at least 500kB saving in MEMORY
That's a fallacy. Static binaries also (completely) share their text
segments with every instance of themselves.
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <firstname.lastname@example.org> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>