Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!news.u.washington.edu!serval!hlu From: hlu@eecs.wsu.edu (H.J. Lu) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: 386BSD or LINUX? Message-ID: <1992Nov5.185416.19643@serval.net.wsu.edu> Date: 5 Nov 92 18:54:16 GMT Article-I.D.: serval.1992Nov5.185416.19643 References: <Nov.2.20.33.38.1992.18690@remus.rutgers.edu> <1992Nov4.052106.29266@menudo.uh.edu> <13961.9211051436@thor.cf.ac.uk> Sender: news@serval.net.wsu.edu (USENET News System) Organization: School of EECS, Washington State University Lines: 20 ------ spedpr@thor.cf.ac.uk (Paul Richards) writes: As time goes by I think you'll find that 386bsd has more thought put into it. Linux developes very rapidly but not necessarily along the right lines. Shared libraries is an example of this, they've been available in Linux for quite a while but it's not the best implementation. We may have to wait a while before they get put into ------ I think it is a matter of opinion. Shared library under Linux is not perfect. But it serves its purpose. If you take a close look at Linux implementation, you will find out there is very little overhead in kernel and user space. No tools need to be changed. No new tools are needed. We welcome new ideas. When 386bsd comes up a new implementation for shared library, Linux will use it if we think that is better than the one we have now. H.J.