From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 14:50:03 +0200 From: Enrico Weigelt To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] Announce: standalone libixp Message-ID: <20070701125003.GB10308@nibiru.local> References: <20070630153814.GA17008@nibiru.local> <20070630164716.GQ28917@kris.home> <20070630173039.GB1435@nibiru.local> <20070630174150.GS28917@kris.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070630174150.GS28917@kris.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8eb49358-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 * Kris Maglione wrote: > On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 07:30:41PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote: > >Don't you want people the freedom to choose what they like best ? > > There is no choice involved. If you install a shared library, > it will be used by default on most systems. This realy depends on how the application is built. > >There are valid reasons for using shared libraries, ie. not the > >need to rebuild applications on library update or saving resources. > > Saving resources is not relevant here. For me it really *IS* relevant. I'm working in embedded environments with very limited resources. > libixp is so small that the resources required to dynamically link > it are greater than those required to statically link it. Well, if it would be just a few pages, you maybe could be true. But (at least at my site) the .a is about 100k and the the .so about 90k large. cu -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Enrico Weigelt == metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce: http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions: http://patches.metux.de/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------