Re: DragonFly 3.4 release planning

On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Max Herrgard <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 05:22:29PM +0200, Francois Tigeot wrote:
> > Besides, this whole static binaries in / at all cost business seems to be
> > based on groundless fears.
> > Other Unix-like operating systems have been using dynamic libraries for
> their
> > root filesystems for many years and I have yet to encounter a case where
> > this caused real issues and rescue binaries saved the day.
>

I've been saved by exactly that in more than one instance on DFly: when
/usr wasn't available (was on a separate partition; still the default for
UFS installs); when the libc/etc.. were out of sync with the binaries in
question.

Also another thing to consider -- static binaries can fork/exec faster than
their dynamic equivalents generally; for sh, this might actually be
important, considering how often it is invoked.

-- vs;