Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gumby!yale!yale.edu!noc.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet From: John Dyson <dysonj@delphi.com> Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Subject: Re: Shared Library Status ? Date: Sun, 6 Mar 94 20:58:37 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Lines: 19 Message-ID: <BQxp3dd.dysonj@delphi.com> References: <JKH.94Mar4163154@nx.ilo.dec.com> <BDC.94Mar5153350@blackjack.ai.mit.edu> <JKH.94Mar5233255@whisker.hubbard.ie> <hastyCM8Buv.26z@netcom.com> <michaelv.762936864@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com X-To: Michael L. VanLoon <michaelv@iastate.edu> Michael L. VanLoon <michaelv@iastate.edu> writes: >I'm sure someone somewhere has measured it, but my perception is that >my NetBSD-current system with shared libs runs quite smoothly. I'm >extremely satisfied with NetBSD-current and its shared lib >implementation. I assume FreeBSD-current's is pretty much the same. Originally, FreeBSD and NetBSD would be about the same. We have made some improvements specifically for the shared libs stuff (In V1.1 or future V1.2 -- I forget.) Startup is better than it originally was, but I am *very* critical of the VM system and it will get better and better. But originally, FreeBSD DID appear to be ok, but we started running fork/exec benchmarks and made some improvements... Since I am very critical, we will be getting more improvements. DG and I are continuously trying to improve it (we are not just doing superficial improvements at all.) John dyson@implode.root.com