Subj : Re: NPTL and Static Linking
To   : comp.programming.threads
From : bluujack
Date : Tue Mar 08 2005 04:30 pm


David Schwartz wrote:
> "Bluejack" <bluejack@bluejack.nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:opsnb60tzgd5j5pn@ox.domain.actdsltmp...
>
> >  Does anyone know if there is some reason that it is not possible
to build
> > a statically
> > linked NPTL-using application?
>
>     Such an application wouldn't run on machines that couldn't
support NPTL
> (due to processor type or kernel version).

I could understand making the default archive for static
linking to be the LinuxThreads version, but to not even include
a .a for NPTL seems draconian, particularly since the complexity
of actually obtaining a source distribution of glibc and building
your own .a is not for the casual developer (or Joe Sixpack, as
Ulrich would say, although the Joe Sixpacks I know are unlikely
to be doing much of anything at a linux command line).

> > Insight?
>
>     Compatability.

Well, I agree with the principle, if not with the policy. Reasonable
people might want to build a statically linked application with
NPTL, even without expecting to distribute to uncontrolled kernels.
Seems like, as with most things in the linux world, the prevailing
philosophy of "Here's a gun, don't shoot yourself," would be the
preferable policy.

Seems like it's the distribution maintainer's call, though, so I'll
take it up with Debian.

-b

.