From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-March/012472.html | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 87 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-March/012472.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-March/012472.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-March/012472.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-March/012472.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..5b86d024b --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-March/012472.html @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] executable libraries + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] executable libraries

+ Pascal Terjan + pterjan at gmail.com +
+ Thu Mar 1 22:36:08 CET 2012 +

+
+ +
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 21:22, Maarten Vanraes <alien at rmail.be> wrote:
+> I noticed that on my system, some libraries are marked executable and others
+> aren't.
+>
+> I know that certain libraries are executable, like libc, but i figure that this
+> is rather the exception rather than the rule.
+
+Yes but I think all c/c++ libs are generated with execution permission
+
+> I wonder if we should have some kind of policy about this?
+
+I don't think so
+
+> I can be wrong, but i didn't think it's necessary to make libraries as
+> executable?
+
+For most of them it is not useful
+
+> I don't want any bikeshedding, but what do you think? is such a policy useful?
+> or not?
+
+I would say it doesn't matter and would not spend any time on it
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1