Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #11395
| From | Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | gnu.bash.bug |
| Subject | Re: remaking bash, trying static, glibc refuses static...? |
| Date | 2015-08-19 10:58 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8632.1439996305.904.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink) |
| References | <55D106B2.9000705@tlinx.org> <20150817044932.GB1584@vapier> <55D396EF.8030102@tlinx.org> <20150819031852.GU1584@vapier> <55D408E4.9000500@tlinx.org> |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
On 18 Aug 2015 21:41, Linda Walsh wrote: > Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 18 Aug 2015 13:34, Linda Walsh wrote: > > (2) it's using the nss system which lets people drop modules into the system > > at anytime and change the overall lookups to use that. statically linking a > > specific subset would block that ability. > --- > The linux kernel is a perfect example of a statically linked program that > can dynamically load plugins to provide authorization data from external > sources. Static doesn't mean you can't support 3rd party plugins/libs -- > like LDAP. which is what the current glibc code already does and why you get a warning when you link things staticlly. i'm not sure how you can argue both sides of the fence on this. -mike
Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar
Re: remaking bash, trying static, glibc refuses static...? Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> - 2015-08-19 10:58 -0400
csiph-web