🚀 go-pugleaf

> > For one thing, Linux uses
> > shared libraries so when you link your program it doesn't even
> > contain any library code, only a start-up stub.
>
> Uhhhh, yeah - but there are statically linked libraries as well right?
> And isn't printf and malloc and all that basic stuff in a static lib?

Nope, shared libraries exist, and are the default.

For standard libraries, having them shared is best, since bug
fixes to the libraries propogate to your code.  For less standard
stuff, static libraries are good because more customers can use
the product.  Thus, for the latter case, LGPL libraries are a pain,
but for the first case, they're fine.

> Ok, lemme get this straight - I distribute a statically linked binary but
> along with it I include, for anyone who wants it, an object file and tell
> him what compiler flags to use to re-link it on his system.  That way, if
> the libraries change or he thinks he has better libraries than the ones I
> linked with he can do it?  This sounds reasonable.

Er um, I always thought this part as being painful.  Has any company
actually done this (other than with operating systems or libraries)?
--
Darin Johnson
djohnson@ucsd.edu
    "Are you a doctor?"   "No, but I watched."