On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 07:54:16PM +0100, Charles Forsyth wrote: > >> > >> Don't shared libraries also typically provide memory savings? One > >> version of your c library "resident" for all VM spaces to map? > >> > > that's often quoted as a consequence, but in practice, > not that i've seen in ... what is it now? ... at least six or > seven different systems. i think the trouble is that to get savings > that make the pain worthwhile you still need various forms of > discipline, but with shared libraries, people are even less concerned. > and RSS continues up. > > another is bug fixing at a stroke, but it also allows > bug and trapdoor introduction at a stroke. I seems that the majority of the problems associated with shared libraries are testaments to an absolute lack of any sensible management mechanism built into the system. LD_LIBRARY_PATH & co. look more like successful April Fools, than anything else.
Thanks, Roman.
