> A growing libc makes static binaries grow and makes it more difficult to
> strip out unneeded functionality from a minimalist system install. I'd
> been inclined to try and move things the other way and strip stuff out
> of libc into separate libraries but that's obviously not in vogue at the
> moment.

Static binaries don't pull in the whole of libc; they just pull in what
they need, be it from libc or libcrypt, so size should not change.

The _shared_ libc will get bigger, but we'll lose the shared libcrypto.

> Why does crypt need to be in libc? Not even a significant fraction of
> applications need crypt?

Goes for very many libc components. Quite a lot of userland needs libcrypt
(not much as a proportion, but a non-insignificant number).

Mark Murray
Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to