Re: A completely different approach to EH runtime

["H . J . Lu" <hjl at valinux dot com>]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:07:03PM +0000, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> 
> As I see it, the nightmare scenario is that a shared library is installed 
> that brings down the system and prevents it from rebooting because 
> critical system processes depend on that shared library in some way.  
> Again, on NetBSD this can normally be recovered by bringing the machine up 
> single user and removing the buggy library (assuming that the old one 

I never said it couldn't be recovered. Installing a new gcc to bring
down the whole machine is not acceptable to Linux. I don't care what
NetBSD thinks.

> wasn't blown away -- a good versioning policy will solve this).  We can do 
> this because the critical programs in /bin and /sbin are all statically 
> linked.  Of course, a sensible sysadmin would have tested his new 
> libraries first before installing them :-)
> 
> Simply installing a new shared library in /lib shouldn't bring the system 
> down if it has been well engineered, provided the inode of the old library 
> isn't overwritten (use install not cp).
> 

Of course, please read my other replies related to libgcc. We know
how to deal with it in glibc.

-- 
H.J. Lu (hjl@valinux.com)