* freenetwork at web.de <freenetwork at web.de> [2006-02-15 17:08:05]:
> i don't think it is wise if all the binary libraries have the same name!
>
> cpu identification has not to be only done by the installer to fetch the
> correct lib, but also when running the node.
> people (me) tend to copy data and even java programs from windows to linux
> and vice versa, or having multiple operating systems on the same computer and
> run java programs from one single location.
> now the best that can happen if by windows box runs a debian binary (or even
> extremely more worse: a sse3 lib from work on my athlon thunderbird at home -
> that's sure to blow) is that it refuses to work, the words that it crashes.
> to prevent this a cpu detection has to be
> done to keep the node from executing wrong library machine code, to the
> detection has to be in the node. and calling the correct library by its
> filename is FAR easier than to guess if the available lib is the corerect one
> for the platform.
> i think it is also very unintuitive to have different libs share the same
> name as you can never know if the current library is the correct for the used
> machine enviroment, in fact there is IMHO no reason to actually LET them have
> the same name!
At least an obvious one : Simplicity : getting rid of CPUID code in the node.
> also, for multi-os machines it would make sense to have the, e.g. windows and
> linux, library both available and in the same folder without having to swap
> them by a rename script which is extra hassle
>
> so, in short:
> separation of a huge native lib into smaller libpacks - yes
> let them have the same name - many, some small and some large, NO!s
>
Well, it's basicaly a tradeoff : Code duplication against ease of use for
some power users (I don't think that many people are moving around their
node on different CPUs/OSes).
What do Higher Gods think ?
NextGen$
