From: peter@micromuse.co.uk (Peter Galbavy)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Shared libraries - info for 386BSD porting wanted
Date: 11 Sep 92 15:35:37 GMT

Hi,

Due to no response in the bsd group a couple of weeks ago, and the fact
I recently noticed that linux seems to have shared libraries I was
wondering if whoever knows *lots* about them can either (a) try to port
them or (b) help me port the implementaion across.

I realise that this will not be a trivial operation, but it is a starting
point.

At minimum, will someone tell me the "minimum working set" of linux source
files needed to understand how they are implemented. I take it there are
bits in exec() somewhere ? and the linker etc...

Thanks from a frustrated laptop owner without X386 due to lack of disk
space,
-- 
Peter Galbavy
Tech Support, Micromuse Ltd
Phone: +44 71 352 7774          E-Mail: P.Galbavy@micromuse.co.uk

From: veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de (Holger Veit)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Shared libraries - info for 386BSD porting wanted
Date: 12 Sep 92 10:23:27 GMT
Reply-To: veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de

In <peter.716225737@hilly> peter@micromuse.co.uk (Peter Galbavy) writes:

>Hi,

>Due to no response in the bsd group a couple of weeks ago, and the fact
>I recently noticed that linux seems to have shared libraries I was
>wondering if whoever knows *lots* about them can either (a) try to port
>them or (b) help me port the implementaion across.

>I realise that this will not be a trivial operation, but it is a starting
>point.

>At minimum, will someone tell me the "minimum working set" of linux source
>files needed to understand how they are implemented. I take it there are
>bits in exec() somewhere ? and the linker etc...

>Thanks from a frustrated laptop owner without X386 due to lack of disk
>space,
>-- 
>Peter Galbavy
>Tech Support, Micromuse Ltd
>Phone: +44 71 352 7774         E-Mail: P.Galbavy@micromuse.co.uk

Another thread has been just started about that. Don't look at the Linux
sources, the type of implementation is for a hacker's OS ;-), but not for the 
future. Linux uses (as most SysV systems) fixed addresses for shared 
libraries, which is, with one simple word *unacceptable*.

Holger

-- 
|  |   / Dr. Holger Veit         | INTERNET: veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de
|__|  /  University of Duisburg  | BITNET: veit%du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de@UNIDO
|  | /   Dept. of Electr. Eng.   | "No, my programs are not BUGGY, these are
|  |/    Inst. f. Dataprocessing |          just unexpected FEATURES"

From: eric@tantalus.dell.com (Eric Youngdale)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Shared libraries - info for 386BSD porting wanted
Date: 12 Sep 92 13:22:17 GMT

In article <veit.716293407@du9ds3> veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de writes:
>Another thread has been just started about that. Don't look at the Linux
>sources, the type of implementation is for a hacker's OS ;-), but not for the 
>future. Linux uses (as most SysV systems) fixed addresses for shared 
>libraries, which is, with one simple word *unacceptable*.

        Huh? Let me see, BSD does not have shared libraries, and Linux, like
SysV uses fixed addresses...  Exactly what OS does have acceptable sharable
libraries?   When you say "unacceptable", it almost sounds like you will
refuse to use them under linux.  Is this really the case?

        Now that the user address space has been increased to 3 Gb, what
possible difference could it make to you whether the shared library has
fixed addresses or not?  The only drawback that I know of is that some
minor deity needs to decide which libraries get what addresses.  

--
Eric Youngdale
eric@tantalus.nrl.navy.mil