On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 07:36:03PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote: > One assumes that a (much smaller) staticly linked /bin/sh would be > slightly faster still - but doing that isn't really what I think we > should be doing (that option is open to anyone who wants it by > just building a static root filesys) as it loses the ability to > get libc bug fixes by just updating libc.so, and also would consume > a little more overall ram as the libc in sh wouldn't be shared > with anything else.
More importantly, static /bin/sh breaks both LD_PRELOAD and NSS. Joerg
