Re: chromium disabling use of shared libs, BoringSSL
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Thanks for pursuing this, Daniel, and for being civil while doing so.
On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 05:47:46PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> Chromium upstream are keen to discourage use of shared libraries on the
> system and encourage packagers to bundle their own versions.
This looks bad. But let me understand it: the sandbox they're talking about is
a restricted part of the program that refuses to use any shared libraries?
Would it work to statically link against the system library (as opposed to the
bundled one)? As I understand it, they claim that what they bundle is
identical to upstream, so that should work?
Static linking isn't nice, but it's much better than using bundled libraries.
A statically linked package just needs to be binNMUd to get an update.
Thanks,
Bas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1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=DEmJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: