On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Jeroen Ooms <jer...@berkeley.edu> writes: >> I maintain static libraries for libpq for the R programming language >> (we need static linking to ship with the binary packages). > > How do you get that past vendor packaging policies? When I worked at > Red Hat, there was a very strong policy against allowing any package > to statically embed parts of another one, because it creates serious > management problems if e.g. the other one needs a security update. > I'm sure Red Hat isn't the only distro that feels that way.
We only use this on Windows. On platforms with a decent package manager we indeed link to a shared library. > FWIW, we used to have support for building static libpq, but > we got rid of it a long time ago. OK that's too bad. I agree that shared libs are often preferable but in some environments dynamic linking is simply not possible and you need to static link the library into the application. Most C/C++ libraries do support --enable-static and even for most linux distros the static libs are included with the lib-dev / lib-devel package. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers