> James Mastros <email@example.com> writes:
> > Isn't the whole point of _shared_ libraries that one copy will do for all
> > those who need the library?
> I think people confuse things here. Ralf was atalking about
> statically linked binaries using NSS. Here of course two libcs are
> involved (think about it). With dynamically linked binaries, again,
> of course only one libcs is involved.
> Now the question: how does Sun solve this? Answer: they are not able
> to have statically linked programs use NSS. So what do you prefer?
Sun or to be more exact the SVr4 ABI makes this problem a non-issue anyway.
An ABI conforming program may not contain any syscalls. Static linking
would result in this and so it's forbidden anyway. This allows them to
change the entire kernel interfaces without breaking the ABI conformance
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org