From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2229 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: John Spencer Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: interesting discussion about static linking on luajit ML Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 07:14:35 +0100 Message-ID: <508E1ECB.9090903@barfooze.de> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1351491301 3060 80.91.229.3 (29 Oct 2012 06:15:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 06:15:01 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-2230-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Oct 29 07:15:10 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TSicv-0000UP-9A for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 07:15:09 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 16323 invoked by uid 550); 29 Oct 2012 06:15:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 16315 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2012 06:15:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110221 SUSE/3.1.8 Mail/1.0 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:2229 Archived-At: i thought some people here might be interested in a discussion that currently happens on luajit@freelists.org as usual, a strong bias against static linking can be seen, based on myths or bad experience with glibc. especially the statement here about memory usage seems to be a common misconception: http://www.freelists.org/post/luajit/Creating-a-statically-linked-executable-for-a-LuaJITC-program,22 rich, you recently said something about this topic on irc, iirc it was along the lines of: you'd need to link substantially huge parts of libc.a to use nearly as much memory, as is typically wasted with relocation overhead in dynamically linked apps, do i remember correctly ?