Re: ESR: Goodbye Fedora- big picture

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 17:06 -0500, Steve Friedman wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Tom Horsley wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:59:16 -0800
> > "John P. Fisher" <john.fisher@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> 3) I guess if I could wave a wand, I'd have a set of common fundamental
> >> libraries that get shared and maintain compatibility between distro
> >> releases, and everything else would be handled by the applications
> >> themselves. Maybe this is plain dumb, but it sure would be easier for me...
> >
> > I'd just have every single app have its very own versions of every library
> > it needs with a reaper that runs around at low priority hard-linking
> > the ones that are identical :-).
> >
> >
> 
> Then you've forgotten the zlib security issues of only 5 years ago.  A 
> security vulernability was found in a compression library common to over 
> 500 apps.  Those that dynamically linked to zlib were patched with a 
> single upgrade; however, large numbers of apps had to be recompiled 
> because they statically linked to zlib.  This was a *major* security 
> crisis -- and *many* apps/utilities switched to dynamic linking of zlib 
> (and other common libraries) to avoid this happening again.

As a non-programmer, I'm ignorant of many of the issues involved, but
why can't you say: "if you link against an external library, do it
dynamically" as a rule of thumb?  That way you could replace the library
without needing to recompile.  Unless you want to state for sure that
no-one else will use your library, and not place it in a shared
location, that is.
 -Don


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux