From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4872BC69 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:30:14 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAO+0+UbAXQInemdsb2JhbACOLQEBCQo X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.20,300,1186351200"; d="scan'208";a="3267414" Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 26 Sep 2007 10:30:14 +0200 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l8Q8UAwA015068 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:30:14 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAO+0+UbDuhJBnmdsb2JhbACOLQEBAQEHBAYn X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.20,300,1186351200"; d="scan'208";a="1800673" Received: from mail19.bluewin.ch ([195.186.18.65]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 26 Sep 2007 10:30:09 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.58] (85.2.36.8) by mail19.bluewin.ch (Bluewin 7.3.121) id 46F3817C00122938 for caml-list@inria.fr; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 08:30:09 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) In-Reply-To: <1190794775.6800.69.camel@rosella.wigram> References: <46F95938.7030107@cs.umd.edu> <17487E59-04F2-4509-87B5-24377B051E9E@epfl.ch> <46F961E5.5060302@cs.umd.edu> <55A4E82E-3D05-4F79-A8A6-A87905EB4FC8@epfl.ch> <1190794775.6800.69.camel@rosella.wigram> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <5590B742-9084-46C9-A1DB-D7C98E90ECA3@epfl.ch> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_B=FCnzli?= Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Cherry-picking modules (was Re: [ANN] OCaml Reins 0.1 - Persistent Data Structure Library) Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:30:14 +0200 To: caml-list List X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 46FA1892.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; bunzli:01 buenzli:01 ocaml:01 0200,:01 bunzli:01 ocaml:01 avoided:01 statically:01 wrote:01 dynamically:01 caml-list:01 data:02 modules:02 epfl:02 kernel:02 Le 26 sept. 07 =E0 10:19, skaller a =E9crit : > On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 09:22 +0200, Daniel B=FCnzli wrote: >> As for security updates in ocaml, you cannot >> anyway rely on dynamic linking. Which I see as a good thing, for >> applications dynamic linking creates more problems than it solves and >> should be avoided most of the time (except of course for system >> libraries). > > There is a tradeoff between reliability and ease of maintenance > such that for many larger applications dynamic linking is actually > *more* reliable. > > Would you really recommend statically linking your whole desktop > against the Linux kernel?? :)) Did you read the last parenthesis of my email ? Libraries that are =20 guaranteed to be provided with a particular version of an os should =20 be dynamically linked in, but the rest should be mostly static. Best, Daniel