On 27/09/13 22:56, Chris Down wrote: > On 2013-09-26 08:53, Gaetan Bisson wrote: >> Some Arch packages even provide static libraries for convenience, such >> as gcc and glibc. And unfortunately a few higher-level packages also >> provide static libraries because their maintainers did not notice the >> waste of space... > > Well, static libraries are not a waste of space if it was intentional. > Static linking should be preferred for a number of reasons[0], they > should be preferred in any sane Linux distribution (of which, > unfortunately I can't name any at the moment until stali comes out). > > 0: http://sta.li/faq > My favourite counter link calling that opinion full of shit: http://www.akkadia.org/drepper/no_static_linking.html
