Re: dynamic loading, was "Ugly Q, I admit"

On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:41:07PM -0500, Bruce Ellis wrote:
> 
> dynamic loading and shared libraries are distinct (put related) beasts.
> the work i did was for dynamically loadable device drivers for inferno.
> it's kinda cool.  the initial kernel is tiny, even by inferno standards,
> and then other drivers are loaded to customize the experience
> (typically i load cap ssl kfs and sd).  i also use it to load drivers
> that are used on occasion, like kprof or a generic systest.
> the interface is via devdynload.
> 
I remember loadable device drivers being mooted a while back.  I like
the idea a lot, although it seems backwards to me: repeating the
bootstrap stuff in the kernel always struck me as evil, if
unavoidable.  Ideally you'd want to "load" at least some kernel
drivers by inheriting them from the bootstrap loader.  I'm not sure
that the difference can't be minimised almost to nothingness.

> i've never had much time for shared libraries.  given that plan9 does
> not have grossly obese libraries the "shared/saved disk/memory"
> justification seems marginal.  you also avoid a major "single point
> of disaster".  i believe presotto reported being frightened by
> shared libraries (and clowns) as a child.
> 
Shared library are a curse, but until everyone sees them in that
light, they'll be with us for a long time to come.  It's a fashion
thing.

> btw e[acl] is the compiler port for the playstation 2 ee5900.
> 
I never even remotely dared hope there'd be Plan 9 for the PS2.  Can I
start dreaming?  Shall I spend some money and offer to help?

++L