Mailing List Archive: static vs dynamic doc ref?

static vs dynamic doc ref?

Mar 6, 2007, 12:28 PM

Post #1 of 3 (182 views)

Can someone point me to the documentation regarding "If it's possible to create
either a dynamic or static library, you should create both." (paraphrase of
something vapier said at one point many moons ago, but I'm not trying to hold
mike against that). I ask because I sense a new release of perl looming in the
near future, and everytime one of the questions we're asked is why we build both
a static and a dynamic library for perl (and to be honest, since perl isn't one
of those apps you need running in an emergency single user boot - that i'm aware
of anyway - I never have a good reference).

And yes, given the option, I'd do away with sys-devel/libperl all together and
just build the library once, preferably dynamically since it leaves a smaller
footprint for perl ;)

~mcummings

--

-----o()o----------------------------------------------
Michael Cummings | #gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl
Gentoo Perl Dev | on irc.freenode.net
Gentoo/SPARC
Gentoo/AMD64
GPG: 0543 6FA3 5F82 3A76 3BF7 8323 AB5C ED4E 9E7F 4E2E
-----o()o----------------------------------------------

Hi, I'm a .signature virus! Please copy me in your ~/.signature.

Re: static vs dynamic doc ref? [ In reply to ]

vapier at gentoo

Mar 6, 2007, 1:17 PM

Post #2 of 3 (180 views)

Permalink

On Tuesday 06 March 2007, Michael Cummings wrote:
> Can someone point me to the documentation regarding "If it's possible to
> create either a dynamic or static library, you should create both."
> (paraphrase of something vapier said at one point many moons ago, but I'm
> not trying to hold mike against that). I ask because I sense a new release
> of perl looming in the near future, and everytime one of the questions
> we're asked is why we build both a static and a dynamic library for perl
> (and to be honest, since perl isn't one of those apps you need running in
> an emergency single user boot - that i'm aware of anyway - I never have a
> good reference).

i dont think this has really been documented properly, but the logic behind it
is pretty simple ...

not providing static libraries and only providing dynamic libraries prevents
people from compiling their own static applications on the fly
-mike

Re: static vs dynamic doc ref? [ In reply to ]

mcummings at gentoo

Mar 6, 2007, 1:30 PM

Post #3 of 3 (179 views)

Permalink

On Tue, 6 Mar 2007 15:17:46 -0500
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday 06 March 2007, Michael Cummings wrote:
> i dont think this has really been documented properly, but the logic
> behind it is pretty simple ...
>
> not providing static libraries and only providing dynamic libraries
> prevents people from compiling their own static applications on the
> fly -mike

then maybe its a flaw in the inherited methodology of how we build
perl, since we build perl itself against the static vice the dynamic
(instead, we could just build the static and let it sit to the side and
build the the dynamic as part of the main perl build process). Wish I
could get some examples of static apps building against the static
libperl (since in my microcosm, everything builds against what perl
tells it to with perl -V:libperl, which is libperl.a only because
that's what the main perl ebuild builds right now). i won't claim to be
sold on the concept, but i think i can work with it. Thanks mike :) And
see - an almost -dev question on dev, who woulda thunk.

~the other mike

--

-----o()o----------------------------------------------
Michael Cummings | #gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl
Gentoo Perl Dev | on irc.freenode.net
Gentoo/SPARC
Gentoo/AMD64
GPG: 0543 6FA3 5F82 3A76 3BF7 8323 AB5C ED4E 9E7F 4E2E
-----o()o----------------------------------------------
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list