Martin, Jason H wrote: > -static would work. The downside is that a totally static-linked > binary is very large. The effect is multiplied when you consider that > cfservd / cfrun / cfagent all would have their own statically linked > copy of libc/openssl/berkeleydb. I am aiming to avoid that as disk > space is an issue on some hosts.
<rambling> Ah. Space is not an issue for me, but even if it were, I only have one machine running cfservd, and clients only need cfexecd and cfagent. Using shared libraries, cfexecd is 100 KB and cfagent is 508 KB. Statically linked, cfexecd is 1745 KB and cfagent is 3145 KB. Also, if you are using non-system copies of the OpenSSL and Berkeley DB lib directories, you need to add that in as well (on an example system of mine that brings the total to 3364 KB). That is still less than 1745 + 3145 = 4890, but not by much. And unless the libraries are packaged along with the custom cfengine build, you have more objects to distribute. Of course, the major con to static builds in my view is that you multiply the number of packages that you need to upgrade when the next OpenSSL security problem comes up, since just upgrading the system OpenSSl is not enough. On the other hand, a system OpenSSL update could in theory adversely affect the functioning of cfengine, which is a pretty core system component, so it is kind of nice to have it partitioned from the rest of the system... </rambling> Best, Brendan -- Senior System Administrator The University of Chicago Department of Computer Science http://www.cs.uchicago.edu/people/brendan http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~brendan _______________________________________________ Help-cfengine mailing list Help-cfengine@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
