Andrew Haley wrote:
Avi Kivity writes:
>
> That would prevent static linking not only for Fedora apps, but also for
> user applications built on Fedora.
Yep.
> I don't see a reason to prevent users from using static linking,
See http://people.redhat.com/drepper/no_static_linking.html,
especially
# fixes (either security or only bug) have to be applied to only one
place: the new DSO(s). If various applications are linked statically,
all of them would have to be relinked. By the time the problem is
discovered the sysadmin usually forgot which apps are built with the
problematic library.
The points are excellent, but there may also be points in favor of
static linking. Feel free to statically link all of Fedora and to
recommend that users do so, but don't force them.
With regard to the points themselves:
- many servers and applications don't have security requirements
- dynamically linked libraries expose the application to new bugs
introduced in the library, reducing stability
I'm not advocating static linking; I just oppose the removal of static
libraries. The -devel-static proposal sounds great to me (a benefit to
dynamic linkers is a major reduction in download size for -devel).
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
