Re: why are shared libs chmod +x? (again)
(People, please don't unnecessarily Cc:)
On Fri, Jun 27 1997 11:03 +0200 joost witteveen writes:
> > > > Can someone tell me why shared libs should be installed executable?
> > > > (Actually, Christoph Lameter wants to know this, cf. #7129, but since I
> > > > don't know this either I'll redirect the question to this list.)
> > > >
> > > > This is current policy and I want to add a small note to the paragraph
> > > > stating the reasons for this.
> > And since we're basically recompiling all the libraries for 2.0, this would
> > be a good time to make the change. If no one can provide a good reason for
> > libraries being 755, I say we revert them to 644.
> The only reason I remember is that the shared libraries are
> "executed", only not from the commandline, but within other binaries.
This might be, but the linker doesn't care.
(In Debian 1.1 we had the shared libraries 644, IIRC).
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .