[arch-general] glibc 2.18-5 question

[Allan McRae]

On 27/09/13 22:56, Chris Down wrote:
> On 2013-09-26 08:53, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
>> Some Arch packages even provide static libraries for convenience, such
>> as gcc and glibc. And unfortunately a few higher-level packages also
>> provide static libraries because their maintainers did not notice the
>> waste of space...
> 
> Well, static libraries are not a waste of space if it was intentional.
> Static linking should be preferred for a number of reasons[0], they
> should be preferred in any sane Linux distribution (of which,
> unfortunately I can't name any at the moment until stali comes out).
> 
> 0: http://sta.li/faq
> 

My favourite counter link calling that opinion full of shit:

http://www.akkadia.org/drepper/no_static_linking.html