[arch-general] Fwd: Proposal for the static library problem in Arch

[Dan Liew]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 28/09/13 19:32, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 28.09.2013 16:26, schrieb Delcypher:
>> I really don't think that completely removing static libraries from
>> the repositories is the correct approach because it I believe the
>> choice of whether or not to have static libraries on your system
>> should be down to the user and not the distro
> 
> This has been discussed more than once, always with the same result.
> Static libraries are a dead end and are going away.
> 
I think it's a shame people think that static libraries are completely
dead. Although I agree that shared libraries are usually preferable to
static libraries there are circumstances where their use is warranted
(e.g. building portable executables).

I would also be remiss if I did not point out a prominent software
project that I doubt will ever switch to using shared libraries
completely which is LLVM. [1] explains the reasoning behind using static
libraries which is completly sensible.

I notice that the Arch llvm package still has it's static libraries.

Just my two cents.

[1] 11.4.2. LLVM is a Collection of Libraries
http://www.aosabook.org/en/llvm.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.21 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlJHTyUACgkQnsttD+nT/6MkGQCgv8U+coh7AnL694bCJzue1ZL2
nkgAn0r8PiUE985dr7JLYGlLy+opivpv
=CHx1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----