On Sat, 09 Nov 2019 16:30:41 +0000
Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> I did talk briefly to Mark (also cc'd) as he wrote the original patch
> and he thought it was possibly because the client was also linking
> against sqlite3 and due to the other things the client does, that was
> problematic.

It *shouldn't* link against sqlite3. But! The commit in question refers
to RHEL5 and LD_LIBRARY_PATH, and I think that shook loose a memory:

I think at one point, we had a Crucial Bug Fix in sqlite3, in our build
system, and if we didn't statically link, there was a risk of getting
the broken version at runtime.

> The client lib doesn't and the server side should behave just like any
> other linux binary afaik so we should be ok with a dynamicly linked
> sqlite3?


The issue here was, I believe, not "dynamically-linked sqlite3 per se",
but "dynamic linking, plus LD_LIBRARY_PATH, picking an sqlite3 which
caused us specific problems".

In the Yocto environment, I think we're reasonably sure that we always
get a clean Yocto-built sqlite3, and that *should* be fine.

So I'd say go for it, but if you see weird sqlite3 stuff that happens
only very occasionally, look at this first. :P

Openembedded-core mailing list

Reply via email to