Static linking considered harmful

[n0dalus]

On 11/24/06, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:
> Erik van Pienbroek writes:
>  >
>  > The first thing that comes in my mind is bundling your
>  > own shared libraries with the application, but for that to
>  > work the LD_LIBRARY_PATH= hack is needed, which is also evil.
>
> I read this a couple of times, and I still don't know what problem
> you're referring to.  The usual technique is simply to provide a
> wrapper script that sets up whatever environment is required and
> exec's the application.
>

Doesn't using LD_LIBRARY_PATH have the same effect as using static
linking? Since you're no longer using shared libraries provided by the
system but using your own possible outdated/buggy versions, just like
you would be if you linked statically.

+1 for -static rpms

n0dalus.