That's a good point. I'm only going to be distributing a few binaries
that have to link against libprotobuf so that's probably a better


On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Kenton Varda<> wrote:
> FWIW, one way to make your life a lot easier might be to statically link
> against libprotobuf.  That way you do not need to distribute anything, and
> you do not need to distribute a new package when you update to a new version
> of protocol buffers.  This is the approach we take at Google -- we
> statically link everything except basic system libraries.
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Peter Keen <> wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>> I was wondering if anyone out there had built an RPM spec file for
>> protobuf. I'll be needing to distribute the C++ runtime library to a
>> set of machines and I'd like to be able to chuck something in a shared
>> yum repo and be done with it, rather than having to copy around a
>> tarball or something.
>> Thanks,
>> Pete
>> >>

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to