On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Richard Hipp <drh at sqlite.org> wrote:
> There are multiple competing implementation of libc, and (unless I am > mistaken) Android and MacOS/iOS use completely independent libc > implementations. You could argue that various implementations of libc > are collectively more widely deployed than SQLite. But there is only > one implementation of SQLite, so if we talk about single > implementations rather than competing implementations of the same > interface, then SQLite seems to still come out on top. > The vast majority of systems have a single libc installed, whereas the vast majority of systems have multiple instances of sqlite installed. Chrome/FF/etc each compile it in. > What am I overlooking? Would it be overly brash to claim that SQLite > is the second most widely deployed software component in the world > today, after the Gailly/Adler zlib implementation? Or maybe the > third-most after zlib and libpng? > i _suspect_ that most (certainly not all) zlib users link to the system's zlib, instead of embedding it (because it's everywhere and, unlike sqlite, rarely changes). You have long encouraged products to embed sqlite, rather than use a system-wide copy. -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
