Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!news.ultranet.com!news.sprintlink.net!matlock.mindspring.com!usenet From: rsanders@interbev.mindspring.com (Robert Sanders) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Static vs. Shared binaries in / Date: 08 Jun 1995 18:17:28 -0400 Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization Lines: 18 Message-ID: <87zqjsxxxj.fsf@interbev.mindspring.com> References: <3qfn52$188j@troy.la.locus.com> <3qo3m8$aq7@park.uvsc.edu> <3qvdsn$ioo@helena.MT.net> <3qvs1d$oj6@park.uvsc.edu> <3r7f8g$fb4@helena.MT.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: interbev.mindspring.com In-reply-to: nate@trout.sri.MT.net's message of 8 Jun 1995 18:24:16 GMT X-Newsreader: (ding) Gnus v0.83 On 8 Jun 1995 18:24:16 GMT, nate@trout.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams) said: > I ran with a shared / for awhile, and I hated it. Basicaly, my system > went completely belly-up when I replaced libc.so since all of the entry > points of running programs changed. This is *not* good with a system > that uses the FS binaries for backing store. Um, the new libc.so would have a different inode number, right? So already running programs wouldn't be using it. The old libc.so would be either renamed or unlinked; however, since the in-core vnode was still in use, it would also still be available for programs that were using it. This is the same thing that happens when you unlink() an open file. You may have had problems with a shared /, but that doesn't seem like a valid explanation. -- Robert