Subject: Re: HEADS UP: migration to fully dynamic linked "base" system
To: Bill Studenmund <email@example.com>
From: Matt Thomas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/26/2002 10:31:50
At 10:24 AM 8/26/2002, Bill Studenmund wrote:
>If you had read Luke's post closer, you would have seen:
> + Static linking of programs is still supported; just set
> LDSTATIC=-static in the Makefile or make(1)'s environment.
> Of course, such programs will not be able to benefit from
> future features such as dynamic modules for nsswitch, locale,
> authentication (PAM ?), etc.
That's not satisfactory since the entire build will be -static.
If you don't care about those features (and I don't), then you'd
like a build option to have "traditional" shlib support. Note that
one platforms (powerpc) shared programs cause almost all pages in
the process need to be swapped backed.
Note that there is small performance penalty with shared libraries
that some may not want to pay (the reason why we backed off from
libcc1.so for the gcc backends).
Matt Thomas Internet: email@example.com
3am Software Foundry WWW URL: http://www.3am-software.com/bio/matt/
Cupertino, CA Disclaimer: I avow all knowledge of this message