From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2011 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luca Barbato Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: filesystem layout Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 15:41:42 +0200 Message-ID: <5061B496.9020807@gentoo.org> References: <50618D43.2000704@gentoo.org> <50619404.6030207@gentoo.org> <20120925112629.GA44376@intma.in> <50619711.5000102@gentoo.org> <87d31agsfa.fsf@gmail.com> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1348580519 23795 80.91.229.3 (25 Sep 2012 13:41:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:41:59 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-2012-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Tue Sep 25 15:42:03 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TGVOk-0007z8-Sp for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 15:42:03 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 15689 invoked by uid 550); 25 Sep 2012 13:41:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 15681 invoked from network); 25 Sep 2012 13:41:57 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120801 Thunderbird/14.0 In-Reply-To: <87d31agsfa.fsf@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5a1pre Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:2011 Archived-At: On 09/25/2012 03:09 PM, Christian Neukirchen wrote: > Luca Barbato writes: > >> On 09/25/2012 01:26 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:22:44PM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote: >>>> >>>> Static linking could be dangerous from a security/maintainance >>>> standpoint, but that is me looking at the specific scenarios in which >>>> Gentoo shines. >>> >>> >>> This is a common myth. lazy or ineffective system management is a >>> danger regardless of the linking type. >> >> Spending lots of time unbundling dependencies from packages so they >> could use the up-to-date shared version might bring you to have a bias. >> >> Any system management that force you to reinstall all your packages >> because zlib had a bug doesn't seem efficient. > > Note that you need to *restart all programs using zlib* anyway. > So what's the difference between > > tar xzpf base.tar.gz > and > tar xzpf zlib.tar.gz I guess the whole thing is derailing. You assume that you have a daemon or some kind of permanent program, I'm considering all the programs, permanent and transient. Even in your scenario sys-libs/zlib-1.2.5.1-r2: 31 files, 16 non-files, 767.242 KB Updating zlib would take less than 1mb uncompressed. Updating a whole system few order of magnitude. Again, we are derailing the purpose of this mailing list. The original question could be summarized as "would musl require a specific filesystem layout or non-fhs could be used easily?" and the answer IMHO is that there isn't much in libc that requires a specific layout. lu