On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 02:21:09PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm(a)ATrpms.net> said:
> FWIW again from the number crunching community, sometimes statically
> linking numerical libs shows performance gains (although when the
> problem domain is of that kind the libs tend to be headers-only with
> inlining), and some only commercial available libs only offer static
Not all the number crunching community statically links. For example,
my father works for NASA, and for his project, they rebuild from source
everywhere. This is a requirement since they run the project on a
number of platforms (Linux, Solaris, Windows/Cygwin, Tru64, IRIX).
You faile dot mention whether your father builds his apps statically
or dynamically. Any either way, this distribution model is indeed
Gentoo-like as someone else mentioned in this thread.
> Which brings yet another argument in favour of not disallowing
> statically builds: ISVs love to use these in order to have one build
> for the whole Linux world.
Unless these vendors include object code suitable for re-linking against
a different glibc, they are violating the LGPL if they link against
Are you sure? glibc is not GPL, it's LGPL. and how would a vendor in
2006 be able to ensure that his binaries can relinked with glibc from
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net