Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:10192 comp.unix.bsd:5187 Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!uunet!think.com!paperboy.osf.org!meissner From: meissner@osf.org (Michael Meissner) Subject: Re: Shared libraries - info for 386BSD porting wanted In-Reply-To: eric@tantalus.dell.com's message of 12 Sep 92 13:22:17 GMT Message-ID: <MEISSNER.92Sep16171549@curley.osf.org> Sender: news@osf.org (USENET News System) Organization: Open Software Foundation References: <peter.716225737@hilly> <veit.716293407@du9ds3> <3583@ra.nrl.navy.mil> Date: 16 Sep 92 17:15:49 Lines: 20 In article <3583@ra.nrl.navy.mil> eric@tantalus.dell.com (Eric Youngdale) writes: | In article <veit.716293407@du9ds3> veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de writes: | >Another thread has been just started about that. Don't look at the Linux | >sources, the type of implementation is for a hacker's OS ;-), but not for the | >future. Linux uses (as most SysV systems) fixed addresses for shared | >libraries, which is, with one simple word *unacceptable*. | | Huh? Let me see, BSD does not have shared libraries, and Linux, like | SysV uses fixed addresses... Exactly what OS does have acceptable sharable | libraries? When you say "unacceptable", it almost sounds like you will | refuse to use them under linux. Is this really the case? Ummm, System V.3 uses fixed addresses, and such. V.4 can load the libraries anywhere (V.4 is based on the Sun implementation). -- Michael Meissner email: meissner@osf.org phone: 617-621-8861 Open Software Foundation, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA, 02142 You are in a twisty little passage of standards, all conflicting.