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

Re: conditional dependency?

Roger Leigh <rleigh@whinlatter.ukfsn.org> writes:

> I stopped providing static libraries in all my library packages quite a
> while back.  No one used them, and they were just needless bloat.  I
> can't say I would be upset if we dropped all the static libraries from
> the entire archive--is there actually a real world requirement for them
> in 2008?

MIT Kerberos upstream has dropped support for static linking because of
their new plugin infrastructure, and while they hope to reintroduce it by
popular demand at some point, it's not a high priority.

About the only useful purpose for static linking is when distributing
client binaries to many systems where one can't use the native package
manager and hence can't use real package dependencies.  It lets you limit
the amount of stuff that the person has to install.  I've run into a few
cases like that, but usually the real solution is to fix the underlying
issues (often political) preventing the use of real packages with package

It's more of an issue on systems like Solaris that don't have useful
package managers.

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: