Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends
Peter Samuelson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> [Keegan Quinn]
>> Guillem Jover wrote:
>> >It's one of the few native packages (if not the only one) that is still
>> >statically linking.
>> dpkg appears to be dynamically linked on my unstable/amd64 box:
> It is dynamically linked to some libraries, staticly linked to others.
> Guillem is proposing to dynamically link to all of them.
> I agree with everything in the original proposal. The main reason not
> to link dpkg dynamically to libbz2 etc. is robustness - but I haven't
> worried about Debian's library handling robustness for a long time.
> (When was the last time I installed 'sash'? 8 years ago?)
It might be worth noting that the most recent critical failure of dpkg,
failing to work with kernel < 2.6.22, wasn't prevented by having static
libs. The code blew up, not the linking.
And since you mention sash there could be a sdpkg. That would avoid
needing *_pic.a libs for libdpkg.so.