Subject: Re: why /bin and /sbin static
To: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/19/2001 08:24:39
> [ On Sunday, March 18, 2001 at 21:18:25 (+0100), email@example.com wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: why /bin and /sbin static
> > > If you've ever worked on a VAX 11/780 running 4.1BSD with 63 other users
> > > then you'll know what I mean! :-)
> > no i don't. i must be VERY slow :)
> Actually it wasn't very bad at all (and compared to half or less users
> it was very reasonable), and that's my point!
> The VAX 11/780 with the fastest disks of the day (and *not* on UNIBUS)
> has a very decent I/O throughput ratio to CPU speed. It's a real server
could you please look on this old BSD binaries (if it's possible at all
:)) you much does such commands like ls or ps took space.
i'm sure no more than 20-30kB with static linking because these old
libraries were not such bloated like todays.
i still cant understand why such simple program like df for example needs
OVER 100kB of library code. good written accounting software fits in few