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

Re: static libs ... again

> writers participate in.  When I use static libraries to do crappy code
> development I want to make very sure that the static libraries I use
> are a specific version.. i do not want and can not rely on static
> libraries from versions which may differ over time from the OS vendor.

It is not the use I do, nor advocate ;-). As I said above it is to 
achieve portability of the executable. And I certainly don't advocate
especially compat libs.

>  Having Fedora Extras provide static versions means Extras will be
> forced to supply compatibility versions of those static libraries
> forever to meet the needs of this highly technically skilled set of

I don't think so nor advocate it. Providing the static library doesn't
mean having compat libraries. (as a side note I don't see anything wrong
in providing compat libraries if they are properly packaged and there 
is a maintainer).

> users that make up the scientific programming community.  There are
> deeply systemic problems in the scientific coding practises that I
> participate in, and I don't want to see progressive projects bending
> policies to help rather smart people be even lazier about their coding
> habits.

It is not by not providing static libs that better coding practices 
will be used. Once more I advocate static libs for their portability,
and in the cases when the reasons to use shared libs don't hold.


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