On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Jeff Sickel
<jas@corpus-callosum.com> wrote:
On Nov 13, 2010, at 5:14 PM, David Leimbach wrote:
> Isn't this what Apple does recommend you do with application bundles? Ship
> the whole directory (.app) with all requisite frameworks and libs?
That's the recommended approach for certain types of distributions. The alternative approach is to not do shared/dynamic libraries in the code you ship. That way the only dynamically linked code is that used in the system frameworks. Many folks also find that their applications launch faster when not traversing all sorts of dyldhell.
2-level namespaces help with that too. You can bind paths to particular shared library instances that you're interested in.
There's still the open-ended question of bundles of loadable modules, if you need them.
There's also this vague memory I have of being deeply concerned about a direction I swear I read somewhere on an Apple developer mailing list about static libraries not being supported going forward with Mac OS X.
-jas