*BSD News Article 23826


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.linux.help:8612 comp.os.386bsd.questions:6822
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.386bsd.questions
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!csn!boulder.parcplace.com!imp
From: imp@boulder.parcplace.com (Warner Losh)
Subject: Re: SUMMARY: FreeBSD vs. Linux
Message-ID: <CGFCr0.F84@boulder.parcplace.com>
Sender: news@boulder.parcplace.com
Organization: ParcPlace Boulder
References: <2btv9t$4nb@news.cs.tulane.edu> <2bui0j$blb@fw.novatel.ca> <2butta$jqc@news.cs.tulane.edu>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1993 09:52:11 GMT
Lines: 26

In article <2butta$jqc@news.cs.tulane.edu> cajho@uno.edu writes:
>Sun-OS binaries?  Please elaborate...will this allow access to much commercial
>software?

If you have a Sun to run them on.

>Real shared libraries?  How are Linux's unreal?  What is the diff. between the
>*BSD libs and Linux's libs?

Linux's current shared libraries are a kludge.  Plain and simple.
They require the developer keep jump tables around, or pure copies of
the last release, niether of which is, IMHO, reasonable.  The tools
are a kludge and require you to build the library twice often times.
ELF support is coming, and will make Linux's shared more real.  I had
a heck of a time building the shared OI libraries on Linux, by far the
hardest OS to get shared libraries working (even harder than AIX).

The *BSD shared library support that I've seen is much more dynamic.
It looks up things at runtime, which is what you want in a shared
library implementation.  They are basically SunOS style shared
libraries.

Warner
-- 
Warner Losh		imp@boulder.parcplace.COM	ParcPlace Boulder
I've almost finished my brute force solution to subtlety.