This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: static binaries vs. NSS


On Monday 04 August 2003 14:06, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> Markus Schoder <markus@gammarayburst.de> writes:
> 
> > I think the possibility to deploy statically linked binaries that do not
> > depend on the libc of the target system is very valuable.
> >
> > The fact that this is currently not possible due to the NSS
> > implementation makes me wonder why this design was chosen.  I could
> 
> Note that on Solaris you cannot use static binaries at all due to
> NSS.  Under Linux you can use them but just have to keep the
> restrictions in mind.

So Solaris sucks.  Not a reason that Linux should too.

> 
> > instead imagine say a name service daemon that would be queried for name
> > lookup.  This would nicely decouple the libc versions of the binary and
> > the target system.
> 
> But this would enforce a daemon running everytime and you might not
> have this one in a chroot environment or at system bootup.

Well, then have the current behaviour as a fallback.

Actually isn't nscd smiliar to what I suggested?  It may be meant as
a pure optimisation but perhaps it could also increase compatibility.

--
Markus


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]