Why no static GLIB/GLIB2 libraries?

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Jan  2 17:49, Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > I just figured that neither in the runtime, nor in the devel package of
> > GLIB and GLIB2 are any traces of static libraries.
> 
> Correct.
> 
> > Is there any good reson for that?
> 
> We decided from the beginning to build GNOME shared-only, some of the
> reasons being:
> 
> 1) The core GNOME libraries are backwards-compatible from one release to
> the next;
> 2) Many GNOME components contain modules, which of course don't make
> sense to build static.
> 
> That said, if there is a specific need for *glib* to be both shared and
> static, that should be workable.
> 
> > I'm asking since I'm going to prepare a package which would better be
> > linked statically to GLIB2.  While I have no problems to link the
> > package dynamically against GLIB2, it would serve its purposes better if
> > it could get rid of any package dependency besides cygwin itself.
> 
> Gerrit maintains glib2, so you'll have to ask him, although for glib I
> agree that an exception can be made.

Oh, yes, sorry about that.  It's glib2 which would be helpful to
exist in a static version, too.

Gerrit?


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat