On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 11:18:47AM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >--On Wednesday, November 19, 2003 12:30 AM -0500 Garance A Drosihn ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>have a: chflags ldcache /bin/sh > >Shouldn't that be 'chmod +t /bin/sh' ???
Definitely. Why waste a new bit when there's already a perfectly good one that is (or was) defined for the purpose. As for the implementation, I presume the desired behaviour would be to snapshot the process image (make it copy-on-write) at the point where ld-elf.so invokes main(). You'd probably want LD_BIND_NOW behaviour to minimise the runtime overheads. I don't see any need for this to need massive amounts of RAM - there's no reason why the "snapshot" couldn't be paged normally. I think this would be a big win compared to what we have now - the full benefits of dynamic linking remain and most of the run-time binding overheads are removed. Of course it's not perfect. The snapshot image permanently occupies virtual space (RAM/swap). And there's still the PIC overhead - especially on register-starved architectures like the i386. I wonder how difficult this would be to implement in userland only? Peter _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
