Mark Murray wrote: > Terry Lambert writes: > > Since I have patches to make dlopen work with static binaries, and > [ snip ] > > As to inevitable "where are the patches?", please check the -current > > list archives, you will find at least one set there. > > I've looked without much success. Could you give a timeframe, a subject > and/or something?
Note that the part you snipped indicated that the patches were posted by a third party, and that my own patches had been offered, but were not posted in their entirety to the mailing list. In actuality, I only ever posted portions of my own patches, since they also required compiler and linker changes. Here is the reference for Max Khon's patches, which were posted, by reference, in their entirety: | Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 13:21:42 +0600 | From: Max Khon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | To: Jake Burkholder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: Re: libc size | |http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=379714+0+archive/2002/freebsd-current/20021110.freebsd-current Portions of my patches were posted as part of the discussion which took place in the same thread. There did not seem to be much buy-in on the idea of modifying the compiler tools. The context of the discussion was for dealing with moving the resolver and other things out of libc, so that they could be more easily upgraded. For the purposes of handling PAM/NSS modules, Max's patches would work to move everything back to a static linking footing. FWIW, I dislike this idea, since static ELF libraries do not properly link against other static ELF libraries, and that type of chaning only works for dynamically linked ELF libraries (for no good reason). -- Terry _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"