At 9:02 PM -0500 11/18/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, there was a development resource limitation,
but the decision (discussion) was made approx 6months ago?
(Enough time to solve the problem without a GLOBAL
performance hit.)
Well, yes, perhaps. But there is that issue of "development
resource limitation". Back when we did debate this publicly,
no one stepped forward and said "I have the time to implement
a better solution". Thus, we went with this solution.
Speaking as to what we can do right now, I would not want to
delay the 5.x-stable branch by adding some project right now
to start writing an alternate PAM/NSS solution. If someone
wants to write one for 6.0, that would be good. There is
nothing in this solution which would cause problems for
some later solution. Disk space will only get cheaper.
I can see that it might be worthwhile to statically-link
*some* of the programs in /bin and /usr/bin. Particularly
small ones, where the added overhead would be a significant
percentage of the total execution time of the command.
But I do think we should stick with the present setup for
5.2-release, and consider any fine-tuning of it after that
release is done. 5.2 is still "-current", and it is fine
to leave this as it is for a "-current" release. And by
doing that, more developers will get real-world experience
with this setup, and find out if we have overlooked anything.
[disclaimer: This is just my opinion, as one developer. I
suspect that everyone in the FreeBSD project will agree
that I do *not* speak "for the project"... :-) ]
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn = [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
