On 28 Jun 2011, at 5:34pm, Jan Hudec wrote: > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 11:07:50 +0000, Black, Michael (IS) wrote: >> I'd recommend NOT relying on the system sqlite3. That way you can control >> your changes. > > Let me express very, very strong disagreement with that. In Linux you should > *always* use system sqlite and specify minimal required version as desired. > > That saves space (only one system-wide shared library with the code), memory > (one shared library is only loaded once) and allows upgrading the library > without having to recompile the application, which means when important fix > is made in sqlite, you don't have to recompile all the applications and saves > precious time of your friendly distribution package maintainer.
This works only if you have some idea what your users will be running. Linux doesn't have one package maintainer it has many. You don't know which one your users will be using. Your users may be running other apps which use SQLite. Those apps may rely on the behaviour of one version of SQLite and you may rely on the behaviour of another. If you both link to the system-wide shared library, one of you will be in trouble. Your setup works fine if you're writing for yourself, or for an organisation where you have some contral over the computers. Not when you're writing an app for other people. Simon. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
