On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 04:50:14PM -0800, Chris Quenelle wrote: > Bart Smaalders wrote: > > Why is an install-time solution better? > > It's better to pay a few milliseconds (or whatever) at > install time than to pay a small runtime performance cost. > > Debugging problems with the version selection is easier at install > time than it is at runtime. > > Runtime combinations or pfexec/verexec/isaexec are avoided > by removing verexec from the equation.
pfexec is moving to the kernel soon enough. > Obviously there is a complexity trade-off between complexifying > the installer or comlpexifying the runtime. I think it's > generally better to make that tradeoff in favor of simpler runtime, > if both solutions are reasonable (as they are in this case). The biggest problem with what you propose is that we'd lose freedom at run-time. That freedom is important. Also, ld.so.1 could become smart enough to handle verexec/isaexec combinations if it mattered for performance, and then we'd be down to microseconds of impact at worst. > Because the install-time solution actuall provides less features, > it's (by definition) a simpler solution. The additional feature > is the ability to tweak the version selection algorithm at runtime. Simplicity is not the only criterion. You want the simplest solution that meets the requirements. Is run-time version selection required? If not, then I'd think it should be, though I'd also agree with you. Nico -- _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
