[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo: static/dynamic linking libraries
From:       "Kevin F. Quinn" <kevquinn () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2007-04-30 19:00:27
Message-ID: 20070430210027.128dc96b () c1358217 ! kevquinn ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 05:07:00 +0200
Roman Zimmermann <mereandor@gmail.com> wrote:

> Am Montag 30 April 2007 00:11 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
> > On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 14:56:57 -0700
> >
> > Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > Anyone who wants to build a static binary wants the static libs.
> > > Given the difficulty in universally enabling or disabling their
> > > builds because of build-system differences, building them and
> > > tossing them in the trash with INSTALL_MASK, as Marius suggested,
> > > seems like the best way to go.
> >
> > The best way to go or the only viable short term solution?

Best way to go, IMO.

> That's the point! Universally disabling static builds can't be a
> longterm solution. The only sane way to do this is on a per ebuild
> basis.

The thing about static libraries, is that the ebuild that creates them
doesn't know whether anything else will want to use them.  It may be
that in practice, most libraries are never used in their static form -
but the point is that the ebuild doesn't know enough information to
make the decision.

However, with INSTALL_MASK, the user makes the decision never to have
static binaries, and thus gets a system free of static libraries.

--=20
Kevin F. Quinn

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]