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

Re: Bits from dpkg developers - dpkg 1.16.1

* Henrique de Moraes Holschuh:

> On Sun, 02 Oct 2011, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Couldn't we get rid of static libraries altogether, replacing static
>> linking with ahead-of-time dynamic linking?
> Well, the normal usecase for static libraries and static linking is to
> produce self-contained objects.  If you can link a bunch of dynamic
> objects into a self-contained object that behaves as a static-linked
> object would, I'd say that yes, we could probably do away with static
> libraries.

It's technically conceivable in the sense that the required data is
present in DSOs.  I don't know if it's been implemented.

> I do think it is a bad idea, though.  We don't provide libraries just
> for ourselves, we also provide them for the user to use when building
> his own stuff and they might have other usecases.

So it's probably necessary to continue compiling static libraries
without -fPIC.  This precludes statically linked PIE executables, but
that's probably okay.

Reply to: