On 09/18/2018 02:06 PM, Achim Gratz via devel wrote: > That will not go down well with system packagers. Building "static" is > one of those ideas that apparently can't be weeded out. I expect the > distributions to change their toolchains in no time to default to shared > linking (system installed) libraries or else ignore Go completely.
I'm doing some digging, and from what I can see Debian/Ubuntu added support for shared linking Go libraries and then removed it a couple years later. I'm asking in IRC to try to get a more conclusive/authoritative answer. As a user, the downsides of static linking are increased disk space usage, increased memory usage, and eliminating ASLR. These probably aren't huge concerns in this case. As a packager, the biggest downside is that the package has to be recompiled if any of its dependencies are updated. I'm not sure how the Go team is handling that in Debian. Specifically, is it their job to rebuild reverse dependencies when uploading a new library, or is it my job to notice and rebuild? That's a rhetorical question for this list. I'll ask the Debian Go people at some point. -- Richard _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
