40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh
kris at obsecurity.org
Tue Nov 25 12:50:12 PST 2003
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 12:39:11PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> So, yes, I do think you guys are being lazy in that regard. If this
> is the path you've chosen to go then you have an obligation not to
> tear out major existing system capabilities, such as the ability to
> generate static binaries, in the process.
If this is what you think has happened, you're living in some parallel
> There is a lot of circular reasoning going on here... it's the same sort
> of circular reasoning that John uses to justify some of the more esoteric
> scheduling mechanisms in -current. A because of B because of A, and
> to hell with anyone who wanted to use C.
Keep the ad homenim attacks to yourself, buster! This was uncalled-for.
-------------- 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/20031125/dc6d125d/attachment.bin
More information about the freebsd-current