40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh

[boyd, rounin]

> So.. forking a dynamic sh is roughly 40% more expensive than
> forking a static copy of sh.  This is embarrassing.

read the original paper carefully:


http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/cache/papers/cs/3066/http:zSzzSzswt-www.informatik.uni-hamburg.dezSz~1friedrizSzsvzSzreferenceszSzShared_Libraries_In_Sun_OS.pdf/gingell87shared.pdf

it's conclusions state that they are slower.  this was the
_original paper_ that announced the damn things.