[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Mandatory -dbg packages for libraries?

On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 01:02:17PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 12:32:37AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 11:15:36PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > > 
> > > If there are concerns over archive size, why don't we drop all static
> > > .a libraries at the same time.  Given that in Debian we typically
> > > always link dynamically, is there a need for .a libraries in all but a
> > > handful of cases?
> > 
> > Dropping most .a libraries is something I agree with.  I see no reason
> > why we should have them for most of the libraries.
> As a courtesy to our users. Statically linked programs are slightly
> faster (since they don't need to do PLT lookups, so they spare a jump on
> every function call to a shared object). For people for whom performance
> is critical, providing .a libraries is a good idea.

I agree that for some things it might be useful for have static
libraries, but in most cases they're not.


Reply to: