g-wrap lost - So am I

[Conrad Canterford]

On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 08:31, Michael + Jennifer Garrison Stuber wrote:
> > Could you just include all those libraries in the package ?
> > ? Make the entire binary
> I've thought this myself on occassion.  The plus side of linking things
> statically is that once something is built, you really don't have to worry much
> about dependencies.  There are some of minuses though:  First of all, your
> executables get to be huge, because they've got all this library code linked in.

This was discussed some time ago as a possible solution. If I'm
remembering correctly (which I may not be) it wasn't pursued because a
CD release (which never happened) was felt to be the only practical
means to distribute it. The binary would be huge.
There may be another consideration too - while this would be possible
with 1.6, I'm not sure that it is possible (or at least practical) with
the upcoming 1.8. 1.6 is a monolithic executable that calls some scheme
files. 1.8 is a scheme "script" that calls a number of dynamically
loaded libraries that contain the various bits of C code. I'm not sure
that we can statically link that, and if we did, I suspect huge would
not explain it.

In any case, this would all be academic if the packaging manager would
handle the dependencies nicer than rpm does. I've never had any luck
with up2date, but then again, I stopped trying a couple of years ago.
Its probably much better now.

Conrad.
-- 
Conrad Canterford  (conrad@mail.watersprite.com.au)
Water Sprite Pty Ltd   |  url - http://www.watersprite.com.au/
GPO Box 355,           |  - Australian Tour and Event Management (ATEM)
Canberra, ACT 2601     |  - Ticketing Division.
Mobile: +61 402 697054 |  - Catering Services Division.