Re: Unfortunate dynamic linking for everything

From: boyd, rounin <boyd_at_insultant.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:51:48 +0100
From: "Peter Jeremy" <peterjeremy_at_optushome.com.au>
> >Shouldn't that be 'chmod +t /bin/sh' ???
> 
> Definitely.  Why waste a new bit when there's already a perfectly good
> one that is (or was) defined for the purpose.

the 't' bit was known as the 'sticky' bit to keep frequently used,
sharable (judged by a human) text segments in core.  since then
that bit has been overloaded to death.

shared libraries have always been a mistake.

one clear reason is that it caused a dichotomy of binaries; static
vs dynamically linked.  think about a dynamically linked init(8) ...
Received on Thu Nov 20 2003 - 11:54:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:30 UTC