From: "Måns Rullgård" <mru@kth.se>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: executable archive
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 14:28:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yw1xy8oq3kbb.fsf@kth.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1082462304.27255.76.camel@pc-16.office.scali.no>
Terje Eggestad <terje.eggestad@scali.com> writes:
> Hello everybody
>
> I wanted to share and idea (and I'm sure I going to get booh'ed of the
> list but...) with you all.
>
> One thing have annoyed me for a long time while writing perl progs, and
> that it not possible to "link" it, in that programs must span multiple
> files to be manageable as they grow. I'm sure we all agree that only
> trivial programs can be coded in a single source file.
> The annoyment stems from the fact that a single "executable" must be
> distributed as multiple files.
> A problem with perl, that Larry Wall should have though of right?
>
> Same problem with python (i'm just learning), and a collection of .class
> files for java.
> The problem is compounded that all decent scripting languages allow
> compiled modules in the shaped of a shared object, which make it really
> hard on the developers of the scripting engine to make single exec.
>
> What would solve it is have an executable archive, in where you put the
> top level script, subscripts, shared objects, and any other file it may
> need.
>
> It would be nice to have a general solution to the problem.
>
> My first though would be to make a stub, and put the ar file in the data
> area of the process, something akind to self extracting zip files on
> dos/windoze.
> A couple of problems:
> a) you can't "mount" the ar file to make it visible to the process as a
> part of it's file system view. ( Atleast not without intercepting a
> whole lot of libc calls)
> b) unpacking it somewhere would clobber up your fs as it would not be
> cleaned up after a program crash or machine crash.
>
> Ideally I'd like to see the files in the ar as in the cwd, but that
> would make a namespace collision possible.
>
> The second though would be to do it in the kernel, which would go
> something like this:
>
> - let the exec() handler in the kernel recognize the exec-ar, just like
> it recognizes the #! magic.
> - use the loopback mount device to mount the ar (read only) under
> /proc/self/archive
> (- it would be nice to do something to the env's like adding
> /proc/self/archive to PATH, LD:LIBRARY_PATH, of honor a file like
> /proc/self/env to modify the envs)
> - now exec the file /proc/self/archive/main
Apart from the /proc manipulations, all of the above could be
accomplished using binfmt_misc and a suitable wrapper program.
--
Måns Rullgård
mru@kth.se
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-20 12:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-20 11:58 Terje Eggestad
2004-04-20 12:28 ` Måns Rullgård [this message]
2004-04-22 19:47 ` Pavel Machek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=yw1xy8oq3kbb.fsf@kth.se \
--to=mru@kth.se \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®