Achim Gratz Stromeko at
Wed Sep 19 19:17:53 UTC 2018

Gary E. Miller via devel writes:
> I've been working with RHEL for a few months now.  Their insistence on
> one version of every library is killing them.  When just one package
> needs an old library that holds back ALL the other packages.  Which
> cascades, so now all their packages are old.  A real train wreck.

No it doesn't, not if the libraries are properly API versioned.  As for
RHEL using older versions of things, you'd need to understand what their
target market is.  (Hint: you are not and you're not a paying customer

> Long, long, ago, all programs were static.  It made it really easy to
> move binaries around.  Debug was easy.  Multiple library versions were
> not a problem.

Look, been there, done that.  That was fun when you wanted to change one
kernel variable and had to build a new kernel, then take the whole
machine down for a reboot and wait an hour for it to come back up.  Or

> Then came hard disks.  Everyone knew that dynamic linking was slower, and
> caused many problems, but it saved very expensive disk space.

You are missing the point, entirely.  Dynamic linking is not about
saving space or making things slower or faster.  It's an essential part
of configuration management for a system that's built from many parts
that are built and updated independently.  Static linking cannot solve
that problem.

+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

SD adaptations for KORG EX-800 and Poly-800MkII V0.9:

More information about the devel mailing list