Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 13:30:06 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> Cc: kse@elischer.org Subject: Re: Not providing static libraries (libkse/libpthread) Message-ID: <200303262030.h2QKU6A7089578@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 26 Mar 2003 13:51:39 EST." <3E81F6BB.BFFE3F33@vigrid.com> References: <3E81F6BB.BFFE3F33@vigrid.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <3E81F6BB.BFFE3F33@vigrid.com> Daniel Eischen writes: : Is there a good reason for providing static libraries for : libpthread/libkse? I'd like to not support them to get : rid of some hacks to make sure certain symbols are present : in the static library case. That would be a big hassle for the company I work for. We have many static binaries that are threaded and providing a dynamic one has a performance impact of a few percent. While we have done dynamic linking in the past, and have the infrastructure to do so in the future in our build process, this may cause us problems in the future if we need to deploy a static binary (which tends to be safer to do once a long period of time has passed between the generation of the system and the deployment of the updated binary). How gross are the hacks? Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200303262030.h2QKU6A7089578>