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
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.