Re: Should .a library contains non-reallocatable code?
Simon Richter writes ("Re: Should .a library contains non-reallocatable code?"):
> Am 24.02.2015 um 11:01 schrieb Alastair McKinstry:
> > I agree with this; are there any cases where only a static library _is_
> > provided, and if so why? why not provide a .so?
>
> In libvxi-dev I provide a -fPIC .a library only, mainly for size reasons
> (the library consists of RPC proxy/stub code for the VXI-11 protocol,
> and is completely generated with rpcgen).
Do many other packages use that library ?
Not providing a shared library `for size reasons' seems
counterproductive, as the static library ends up being copied into the
binaries of all the dependencies...
Perhaps I have misunderstood.
Ian.
Reply to: