On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 13:40:15 -0400 Calvin Morrison <mutantturkey@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 3 August 2012 13:03, Leonid Isaev <lisaev@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 11:35:10 -0500 > > Sander Jansen <s.jansen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Leonid Isaev <lisaev@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 10:31:06 -0400 > >> > Jack Silver <jacksilver045@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > >> >> To exchange information I want to let know this list that I have > >> >> filled a feature request form to ask for a statically builded pacman. > >> >> > >> >> https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/30993 > >> >> > >> >> Comments welcome in the bug manager. > >> >> > >> >> جاك الفضة > >> > > >> > Well, bugtracker is not a place for comments, it's for solutions. > >> > > >> > Anyway... statically compiling things is not a way of avoiding trouble, > >> > at least not in a self-sustained fashion. So, if you propose to have > >> > pacman in [core] statically compiled against all needed libraries, I > >> > would be against that as the package will be an unmaintainable mess. > >> > >> Why would it be a unmaintainable mess? > > > > Because it is _statically_ compiled so the whole binary has to be rebuilt > > even after a minor update of one of the libraries. This is assuming that > > you can actually make such binary with gcc... > > No. > > It only needs to be recompile when the compiler feels like it. If the > perceived benefit of the newer library to link against is greater than > the time and energy it takes to recompile and package a product, then > the compiler won't do it. > > If curl does a minor bump fixing a function that pacman doesn't even > use for example, we then we probably wouldn't bother. Now if it was a > critical update then yes, we would obviously do it. Making this decision IS a maintainance effort... > > there is a whole discussion on why static linking is good on http://sta.li > > Calvin -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key: 0x164B5A6D Fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
