Re: REMINDER: Don't dynamically link distributed executables (was Re: question about paragraph in INSTALL file)

From: Jan Vroonhof <vroonhof(a)math.ethz.ch&gt; Date: 07 Jan 1999 13:02:26 +0100 Rick Campbell <rick(a)campbellcentral.org&gt; writes: However you forget that with modern libc it is close to impossible to static link. c.f. Solaris. Well, actually I didn't forget it exactly, but I did conveniently forget to mention it :-) Still, wherever possible, one should statically link for network distribution. As far as I can tell, while Sun is fighting Microsoft in the public arena, their technical decisions are some of the biggest reasons around for switching to the dark side, er, NT. I'm not sure that even HPs C++ compiler is as bad as Sun's is these days. It's really kind of embarrassing to have to have a zillion backward compatibility hacks so that code that works with all of the ANSI compatibility that comes with Visual C++ can still deal with something as archaic as Sparcworks(*). Meanwhile all their C++ effort seems to be in building a friggin graphical development environment. Like, someone should tell them that you're supposed to get the core functionality in place before you starting playing with the bells and whistles. Jeez. Rick (*) Wherever possible, I try to use egcs, but too many management types prefer to pay tens of thousands of dollars per license per year for an inferior product because high quality open source products make them nervous. Go figure.