Re: Moving to shared libraries?
Joachim Breitner <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> yes, there has been discussion, and as far I as know, the reasons in
> still apply. Plus, I think, it is not supported on all architectures.
Thanks for pointing out the older discussion.
My personal interest in using dynamic libraries stems from the desire to
to run multiple applications with a greater amount of code shared,
making hosting those applications on a memory constrained shared virtual
host more feasible.
And, of course, there are all the other reasons that usually recommend
shared libraries---getting security fixes without requiring recompiles, etc.
That said, it does sound like there are a lot of technical issues. I
wonder if some of the infrastructure that the C++ developers have used
to try to handle ABI changes could be helpful?
Regardless, I don't necessarily expect anyone to do this _for_ me, but I
hope that if I could come up with some specific suggestions for how to
deal with this that it would be at least considered?