Re: tlug: Re: static binaries (was: Re: tomsrtbt & glibc)

[Rex Walters <rex@example.com>]

>>>>> Chris Sekiya writes:  (on 04 Nov 98)

> > If it's "way overkill," it probably doesn't belong in /bin or /sbin.
> > (You're most welcome, Mr. Sekiya.)
> 
> Stop reading my mind, Mr. Turnbull ;)

Forgive me my hyperbole.  I meant overkill in the sense that for many of
the executables in /sbin it simply doesn't matter whether or not they
are statically linked.  

I wasn't referring to bloat (on disk or in memory).  FHS 2.0 says /sbin
is for executables only run by an admin and not normal users.  I can
probably live without mkfs.msdos being statically linked.

I'm a little puzzled at Stephen pushing "only static binaries in /bin
and /sbin" since it isn't in FHS 2.0 (nor, by extension, in the Debian
Policy Manual).

As far as the practice predating linux: BFD!  User's home directories
used to go under /usr, too!  *THE* standard reference for any Unix
filesystem hierarchy these days is FHS 2.0 and it permits dynamically
linked executables in /sbin.  And I agree with it.

I also agree, however, that there would seem to be need for more than
just ln and sync being statically linked.  And I'm puzzled why the FHS
doesn't include more -- I wondered if anyone knew the reason.

> *laugh* I know the story that Rex refers to.  At the risk of wasting
> bandwidth, I've attached it -- I think it's _very_ on-topic.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!  I've been looking for this for *years*!
I could never remember enough of it to find it.  Where did you retrieve
it from?  It's far and away my favorite Unix story.

Regards,
-- 
Rex
----------------------------------------------------------------
Next Nomikai: 20 November, 19:30   Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
Next Technical Meeting: 12 December, 12:30 HSBC Securities Office
----------------------------------------------------------------
more info: http://tlug.linux.or.jp Sponsors: PHT, HSBC Securities