At Sun, 31 Oct 2010 23:55:05 +0100 (CET), Felix wrote: > > From: Daishi Kato <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: static linking (Re: [Chicken-users] wish-list > Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 22:51:43 +0900 > > > At Fri, 29 Oct 2010 04:46:34 -0400 (EDT), > > Felix wrote: > >> Uh - that's a lot. Some of them can be easily converted, some are > >> compile-time > >> only, but some others are more subtle. Do you need all those in a single > >> application? > > > > More precisely, here's the list of eggs that I (use in a single app. > > base64 environments files http-client http-server iconv intarweb > > json lolevel mailbox md5 mime posix regex rfc822 smtp spiffy spiffy-cookies > > srfi-1 srfi-13 srfi-14 srfi-18 srfi-4 srfi-69 ssax sxml-transforms sxpath > > uri-common uri-generic utf8-lolevel utils > > Some of those are core libraries that are linked statically with > libchicken.a, and the others should be convertible to allow static > linking. There might be a problem with indirect extension requirements > (see also ticket #420 on bugs.call-cc.org), but that can be > solved. Actually chicken recently (since 4.6.0) got a > `standard-extension' procedure that avoids the boilerplate in > "standard" eggs (those that consist of a single file and provide a > single module of the same name) and automatically compiles for static > linking (to be used in .setup scripts). > > I will start adding static linking support to some of these.
Sounds great. In the meantime, I will try -deploy. Best, Daishi _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
