On 16/03/17 23:24 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
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.
Not if they don't distribute their binaries outside the company.
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.
I'm not talking about shipping anything.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
