Unfortunate dynamic linking for everything

[Robert Watson]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Maxim M. Kazachek wrote:

> MOST people uses /bin/sh only for rc scripts (to be correct, their
> system uses it). David O'Brien just tried to told, that NOBODY he knows
> will be REALLY impacted by performance loss, caused due dynamic /bin/sh
> linking.  You will... So, because Duncan Barclay is impacted by
> performance loss due dynamic /bin/sh linking, ENTIRE FreeBSD community
> will have troubles (at least with NSS) due to static linking... 

Actually, you appear to be agreeing with him, not disagreeing with him. 
Duncan was pointing out that he *does* use /bin/sh as his shell, in
response to David's suggestion that on one uses it and therefore that
making it statically linked wouldn't hurt. 

It strikes me that this whole conversation has gotten a little
confrontational...  The "middle ground" of adding a static /sbin/sh for
scripts soudds like a reasonable choice, and has precedent in other
systems (Solaris).  We can set the boot and periodic scripts to use that,
and interactive users can keep using /bin/sh.  Someone must be using
/bin/sh as a shell, because apparently someone spent a lot of time adding
things like character input editing, filename completion, etc.  We even
use "sh" as the default in adduser(8).

Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
robert at fledge.watson.org      Network Associates Laboratories