[OT] - subthread - perl vs sed Re: [olug] Text search and Replace

[Christopher Cashell]

At Sat, 29 Nov 03, Unidentified Flying Banana m?ntar3, said:

> Perhaps, the smaller 'perl' is built dynamically, with all its guts 
> packed in '.so' files (shared object files). If built statically, then 
> all the guts go in actual executeable file, and are no loaded up at 
> runtime. "ld -Bdynamic" verses "ld -Bstatic", and "man ld" for the 
> excrustainting details.

If you look back through the thread, you'll see that one of the first
things we checked was whether the executables were dynamically or
statically compiled.  The previous posters included that information[1]
in their post, along with the executable size information.

I neglected it in my post, but we are dealing with dynamically linked
executables in all cases.  With Modern Unices (like Linux, NetBSD, and
FreeBSD), essentially all executables are compiled dynamically these
days, with the only normal exception[2] being /bin and /sbin.


 [1] Debian GNU/Linux unstable:
     nexus:~$ file /usr/bin/perl
     /usr/bin/perl: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1
     (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.2.0, dynamically linked (uses shared libs),
     stripped
     nexus:~$ file /bin/sed
     /bin/sed: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV),
     for GNU/Linux 2.2.0, dynamically linked (uses shared libs),
     stripped
 [2] This has recently changed for FreeBSD, in order to better support
     PAM and NSS in base system utilities.  They're still including
     static binaries in /rescue for use during system repair and
     recovery.

-- 
| Christopher
+------------------------------------------------+
| A: No.                                         |
| Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? |
+------------------------------------------------+