On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 08:22:49PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 12:14:25PM -0800, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > >> As for the "works everywhere" argument: > >> > >> - Jakub and others already pointed out that this is mostly a myth. > >> Every non-trivial program needs services which require dynamic > >> linking. glibc's dependencies (iconv, nss, idn, ...) are prominent. > >> But there are an increasing number of other projects which need it. > >> Just look for all the DSOs linked against (explicitly or implicitly) > >> libdl. This includes basically all GUI stuff, all security apps. > >> Heck, even ncurses falls in this category. All of these are out > >> when it comes to static linking. > > > > Sorry, that's reality, not a myth. I'm a physicist myself and have > > worked in/collaborated with several academic or research locations, > > and the picture is the same everywhere: People prefer to create > > statically linked applications to distribute and share with > > colleages. That's true for physicists, chemists, weather science > > stations - most probably all of natural sciences, but perhaps cs. > > > > If you take them the ability to statically link away, then Fedora (and > > then RHEL6) will stop being an attractive development platform for > > them anymore. Do we want that to happen? I don't think so, even though > > the scientific community isn't the largest group certainly. > > > > And please note that the target group we're talking about are simple > > users (even though they may be very skillful programmers), not some > > package monkeys that will create rpms and debs for all systems > > required or that even care about DSO, tarballing their runtime > > enviroment and scripting launchers and so on (just quoting some > > solutions offered in this thread). > > > > On the other hand their applications are usually quite non-trivial w/o > > involving iconv or nss or dlopening plugins (everyone defines > > non-trivial differently of course). Most numerical codes nowadays are > > also a mix of C, Fortran and C++, which makes portability w/o > > statically linking an even greater nightmare. > > > > My 0.02 contribution is to identify the wrongly statically linked bits > > (as done by David), fix these, and let the rest as is, e.g. all > > packages are themselves using DSO, but some prominent ones like the > > glibc/libstdc++ and firends are offering statically linked libraries > > *for users*. > > > > > +1, although it would be a good idea to put the static libs in a > seperate sub package. ( /me has no need for such a beast) Have you seen Dmitry Butskoy's post on this? He has created debuginfo macros that automatically cater for that (packages are then named foo-static, but that's tunable) w/o any changes in existing specfiles. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpYS5KVRbHqu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
