> So.. forking a dynamic sh is roughly 40% more expensive than > forking a static copy of sh. This is embarrassing.
read the original paper carefully: http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/cache/papers/cs/3066/http:zSzzSzswt-www.informatik.uni-hamburg.dezSz~1friedrizSzsvzSzreferenceszSzShared_Libraries_In_Sun_OS.pdf/gingell87shared.pdf it's conclusions state that they are slower. this was the _original paper_ that announced the damn things. _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"