Subject: Re: RFC: migration to a fully dynamically linked system
To: Greywolf <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/29/2001 13:21:02
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Greywolf wrote:
> Well, hm. I'm going to take the silence to mean, "There is no more
> discussion and we are going to do this in spite of objection."
I think it is more that the objections have boiled down to not wanting
change as opposed to specific features of the change. Also, I don't really
think the objections are the majority.
The fundamental point is that we want to be able to add locale support and
new authentication schemes to all(*) programs, even ones in /bin and
/sbin. We really need that to be able to move forward in a number of
directions that I gather the majority of the project folks (including
myself) want to move.
The way the ELF spec works, dynamic module loading only works in
dynamically linked programs.
Thus we need to dynamically link /bin and /sbin.
Everyone agrees we need statically linked recover tools (they were in the
initial posting as I recall), and static binaries will still be supported
(you can make them, run them etc.).