On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Duncan Barclay wrote: > >From: "David O'Brien" <obrien_at_freebsd.org> > >> I'll seriously argue against the 2nd point above. I don't know of a >> SINGLE person that uses /bin/sh as their interactive shell when >> multi-user. Not ONE. Every Bourne shell'ish user I've ever met uses >> Bash, AT&T ksh, pdksh, zsh. > >I don't know anyone that farms lama's, so there cannot be any lama farmers. > >computer$ grep dmlb /etc/passwd >dmlb:*:1166:1166:Duncan Barclay:/home/dmlb:/bin/sh > >Duncan So, imagine, i'm accidentally deleted /bin with your most wanted static sh... And, of course, due to static nature of /bin/sh it was removed from /rescue? Nothing will protect you from shooting in the leg, neither static linking, nor assumption that /lib is OK. MOST people uses /bin/sh only for rc scripts (to be correct, their system uses it). David O'Brien just tried to told, that NOBODY he knows will be REALLY impacted by performance loss, caused due dynamic /bin/sh linking. You will... So, because Duncan Barclay is impacted by performance loss due dynamic /bin/sh linking, ENTIRE FreeBSD community will have troubles (at least with NSS) due to static linking... Sincerely, Maxim M. Kazachek mailto:stranger_at_sberbank.sibnet.ru mailto:stranger_at_fpm.ami.nstu.ruReceived on Sun Nov 23 2003 - 18:35:11 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:30 UTC