News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why has Plan 9 chosen statically linked binaries instead of dynamic ones? (2004). Parent comment

Re:Why has Plan 9 chosen statically linked binaries instead ... by int_19h on Friday February 15, 2019 @09:25PM (#19176616)
To be even more specific, it happened because apps dumped DLLs into shared system directories instead of bundling them alongside the app binary. Since on Windows, each app has its own directory, it's easy to bundle in a way that doesn't mess up other apps.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why has Plan 9 chosen statically linked binaries instead ... by __d on Saturday February 16, 2019 @07:08AM (#19178254)
It became so once the DLL search path was changed to put the .exe file's containing folder first.

Prior to that, the system dirs were searched first, which was the trigger for the DLL hell issue.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why has Plan 9 chosen statically linked binaries instead ... by int_19h on Saturday February 16, 2019 @08:21PM (#19182030)
I mean, if all apps avoided writing to the global folders (i.e. reserve it for OS-managed components), there wouldn't be an issue even with the old arrangement.

But not even Microsoft's own products respected that in practice.

[ Parent | on HN ]