Jonathan Wakely wrote: > If glibc-static was removed from Fedora and that change propagated to > RHEL I know of companies that might stop being customers of Red Hat. > > Being unable to statically link their applications would be a > showstopper for some, and would cause them to move to a different > distro. The thing is, proprietary applications statically linking to glibc are highly likely to be in violation of the LGPL. Or how many proprietary applications do you know that distribute their object files (and/or their source code) to allow relinking against a modified glibc? ucLibc has the same issue, by the way. musl (https://www.musl-libc.org/) is a more reasonable choice for people who want to ship a statically-linked proprietary blob. And, unlike glibc, musl is also designed for static linking. Kevin Kofler _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
