[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: static libs ... again



Rex Dieter wrote:
Quentin Spencer wrote:

See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181897 for the reasoning. At this point, here are my options:

1. tell the user that static libs are bad and to go use another distro
2. put them back in
3. create a -static package

I'm not going to do option 1.


Corrolary: As I don't understand the users' precise requirements for static libs, perhaps asking them why dynamic linking is not sufficient?

I read up a bit on Condor, and nowhere have I seen that it (or it's checkpointing feature) requires the use of statically-linked binaries (only that binaries be statically linked with the Condor libs).

I'd ask the submitter for clarification.

-- Rex


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]