Unfortunate dynamic linking for everything
stijn at win.tue.nl
Wed Nov 19 23:21:28 PST 2003
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 09:27:55PM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote:
> Richard Coleman wrote:
> >It seems /bin/sh is the real sticking point.
> There is a problem here: Unix systems have historically used
> /bin/sh for two somewhat contradictory purposes:
> * the system script interpreter
> * as a user shell
> The user shell must be dynamically linked in order
> to support centralized administration. I personally
> see no way around that. Given that many users do
> rely on /bin/sh, it seems that /bin/sh must be
> dynamically linked.
> There are good reasons to want the system script
> interpreter statically linked.
> Maybe it's time to separate these two functions?
> I would be content to have a static /sbin/sh
> that is used as the system script interpreter for
> rc scripts, etc.
And /usr/bin/sh as a user shell?
"I'm not under the alkafluence of inkahol that some thinkle peep I am. It's
just the drunker I sit here the longer I get."
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20031120/5dd97db1/attachment.bin
More information about the freebsd-current