-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 28/09/13 19:32, Thomas Bächler wrote: > Am 28.09.2013 16:26, schrieb Delcypher: >> I really don't think that completely removing static libraries from >> the repositories is the correct approach because it I believe the >> choice of whether or not to have static libraries on your system >> should be down to the user and not the distro > > This has been discussed more than once, always with the same result. > Static libraries are a dead end and are going away. > I think it's a shame people think that static libraries are completely dead. Although I agree that shared libraries are usually preferable to static libraries there are circumstances where their use is warranted (e.g. building portable executables). I would also be remiss if I did not point out a prominent software project that I doubt will ever switch to using shared libraries completely which is LLVM. [1] explains the reasoning behind using static libraries which is completly sensible. I notice that the Arch llvm package still has it's static libraries. Just my two cents. [1] 11.4.2. LLVM is a Collection of Libraries http://www.aosabook.org/en/llvm.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.21 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlJHTyUACgkQnsttD+nT/6MkGQCgv8U+coh7AnL694bCJzue1ZL2 nkgAn0r8PiUE985dr7JLYGlLy+opivpv =CHx1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
