On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 04:11:11PM -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote: > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Julien Cristau <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 13:28:34 -0500, Gaetan Nadon wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 15:35 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > >> > >> > If you want to install it as a shared library you also want to track > >> > its > >> > ABI and give it a SONAME, which is more work. Shipping it as a PIC > >> > static lib which you don't have to be as careful with possible ABI > >> > breaks, but you can still embed it in something like a python module > >> > (which must be PIC). > >> > > >> > >> This is an important point. We are waisting time trying to guess what > >> this patch is for. > >> > > Oh, I know what it's for, it's needed for pyxf86config. I just don't > > think anyone is prepared to commit to a stable ABI for libxf86config, so > > installing it as a shared library may not be the best plan. > > IMO, just because you decided to make the library shared doesn't mean > you've suddenly agreed to any more ABI stability than before.
the big difference is compile-time vs. run-time ABI stability. which especially in the case of a distribution can make a difference because once you compile a lib from package A into package B, what happens to A doesn't matter until you recompile B too. with a shared library, updating A can break B. (that of course doesn't mean it's the right thing to do, it's just how it is) Cheers, Peter > However, I think you can make a libtool library (bringing in PIC > magic) and have it be static only. In addition to the diff I sent > earlier, add: > > libxf86config_la_LDFLAGS = -static > > A little testing with a dummy project shows this works. _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
