Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Anyone switched to eudev yet?

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

Am Sonntag, 16. Dezember 2012, 23:19:46 schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
> On 15/12/12 12:18, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 14. Dezember 2012, 21:34:54 schrieb Kevin Chadwick:
> >> On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 08:53:35 -0800
> >>
> >> Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com> wrote:
> >>> I guess the other question that's lurking here for me is why do you
> >>> have /usr on a separate partition? What's the usage model that drives
> >>> a person to do that? The most I've ever done is move /usr/portage and
> >>> /usr/src to other places. My /usr never has all that much in it beyond
> >>> those two directories, along with maybe /usr/share. Would it not be
> >>> easier for you in the long run to move /usr back to / and not have to
> >>> deal with this question at all?
> >>
> >> It should be moving in the other direction for stability reasons and
> >> busybox is no full answer.
> >>
> >> On OpenBSD which has the benefit of userland being part of it. All the
> >> critical single user binaries are in root and built statically as much
> >> as possible, maximising system reliability no matter the custom
> >> requirements or packages.
> >
> > until a flaw is found in one of the libs used and all those statically
> > linked binaries are in danger.  Well done!
>
> I don't see why this would only affect statically linked executables.
> If a bug is found in a library, all dynamically linked executables are
> affected as well.  When the BSD packagers put out an update for the
> library, they'll also put updates for the static binaries that use it.
>
> I don't see any security issue here.

with dynamically linked libs you can change just the lib, you can even just 
use some LD_PRELOAD workaround. 

As you said yourself - with statically linked libs you have to replace half of 
your system.. and until the binaries are ready for distribution you can't even 
work around it.

-- 
#163933