home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
- Path: sparky!uunet!spooky!witr
- From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
- Subject: Re: Shared lib benchmarks, and experiences
- Message-ID: <1992Dec12.235116.7484@rwwa.COM>
- Sender: news@rwwa.COM (News Administrator)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: spooky
- Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
- Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
- References: <1992Dec10.150750.2106@rwwa.COM> <1992Dec10.200232.5557@serval.net.wsu.edu> <veit.724064215@du9ds3> <1gdnvrINNp80@life.ai.mit.edu>
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 23:51:16 GMT
- Lines: 27
-
- In article <1gdnvrINNp80@life.ai.mit.edu>,
- ericy@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Eric Youngdale) writes:
-
- | Perhaps you do not understand. The way our libraries are made, you can
- | just drop a new version into the /lib directory, and add a symlink, and you are
- | ready to run the same binaries with the new sharable library. There is no need
- | to relink[...]
-
- According to private correspondence, I'm told you can even do this without
- the symlink by using environment variables.
-
- But, there are severe restrictions:
-
- 1) The two librarys must have identical ``assigned'' addresses, and
- 2) The two librarys must be substantially identical.
-
- By #2 I mean that if the second library is, say, built from a completely
- different set of object files, and a completely different set of ``internal''
- routines, and is of a substantially different size, it won't work (even though
- the ``interface'' is the same). This is why I raised the example of
- Xaw3d -vs- Xaw. On SVR4 each process can elect to use one or the other of
- these libraries with the same binarys (say xterm) at the same time. I
- still don't think this is the case with linux, but correct me if I am wrong.
-
- --
- Robert Withrow, Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
- R.W. Withrow Associates, 21 Railroad Ave, Swampscott MA 01907-1821 USA
-