Subject: Re: RFC: migration to a fully dynamically linked system
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Andrew Brown <email@example.com>
Date: 12/29/2001 18:47:12
>>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.
>All of the binaries in /bin and /sbin don't need locale support.
not all do, but some would "benefit". being an lazy english speaker,
and one who doesn't delve very often into distributed authentication
environments, i'm perfectly okay with the way things currently
operate. locale specific error messages are, i'm told, one benefit of
wibble# setenv LANG fi
wibble# cat ooglyboogly
cat: ooglyboogly: Tiedostoa tai hakemistoa ei l=F6ydy
>>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.).
>How many megs of stuff does all this add to /? What happened to neat,
>complete operating systems that can fit easily on a 1 gig disk with room
>to spare? Or even a 250 meg disk?
i threw together a binary that was a little over two megabytes in size
that contained, as far as i could see, every binary (107 of them) that
i might consider needing to recover from a disaster. since i didn't
spend all that much time on it, i've not yet gotten vi/ex, ssh/telnet,
and nc rolled into it. after that, i'd consider it pretty much
complete. of course...it might be terribly locale specific.
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
firstname.lastname@example.org * "ah! i see you have the internet
email@example.com (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
firstname.lastname@example.org * "information is power -- share the wealth."