Re: depending on shared libbfd from binutils-dev
On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 01:43:12PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 07:54:53PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > > Because libbfd does not have a stable ABI suitable for public use, nor is
> > > there currently a way to express a dependency on this library without
> > > things breaking (you can't depend on "binutils" and have any guarantee of
> > > getting the correct lib).
> >
> > Does make me wonder why we ship libbfd.so and libopcodes.so, instead of
> > just the static libraries.
>
> To reduce the size of the binutils package, iirc. It has about a dozen
> binaries, all of which need libbfd.
No, that's why we ship libbfd-2.15.so; I was wondering why we need to
ship the libbfd.so symlink.
Yes, I'm familiar with how much space it saves to use a shared libbfd
:-)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
Reply to: