Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #11395 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-19 10:58 -0400 |
| Last post | 2015-08-19 10:58 -0400 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to gnu.bash.bug
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: remaking bash, trying static, glibc refuses static...? Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> - 2015-08-19 10:58 -0400
| From | Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-19 10:58 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: remaking bash, trying static, glibc refuses static...? |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8632.1439996305.904.bug-bash@gnu.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 top | Article view | gnu.bash.bug
csiph-web