Re: Merits and uses of static vs. dynamic libraries
On Apr 13, 7:44 pm, SG <s.gesem...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 13 Apr., 18:50, Paavo Helde <pa...@nospam.please.ee> wrote:
[...]
ability to update single DLL-s in the customer installation
creates more problems than solves. To get such a thing
working one needs quite complicated automatic updater, which
would synchronize the customer installation to the last
thoroughly tested combination of DLL-s.
I was more thinking along the lines of *nix, /usr/lib/ and
open source development. If a buffer overlow bug in zlib is
found & fixed and the new version stays binary-compatible I
don't want to have to download and/or recompile Gimp (or any
other program that makes use of this library). :-)
In theory, this should be true. In practice, I've found that at
least under Linux, an awful lot of the libraries do change the
binary interface when they change versions, so any given
executable only works with one version, and when you update one
of the libraries, you generally have to update all of the
programs which use it as well.
--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:james.kanze@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orient=E9e objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place S=E9mard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'=C9cole, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34