On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 05:05:10PM +0200, Xavier Bestel wrote: > On Tue, 2006-09-05 at 16:43, Rodrigo Moya wrote: > [...] > > So, one thing that has been on my mind for long is to get those small > > libraries and merge them together
Fewer library packages would also be a good thing for packagers. Don't have to do as much dependency tracking and explicit versioning of dependencies. OTOH... > [...] > > When the library grows, we could separate it into different .so's > > Don't do that (the separation). If you merge the different libraries > together, you'll merge the sections together. As they must be stored > with a page granularity (4k) you'll earn 2k by merged library on > average, plus less time spent in ld.so for resolving inter-library > dependencies (and yet another memory win). If you separate that into > different .so's you loose what you just won. Also, please remember that every time you move a symbol that is part of the public interface from one library file to another, the soname of the former-location and new-location shared libraries changes. Even if it's all in the same "library package". And changing the soname of just some of the shared libraries in a package that contains many shared libs is a packager nightmare. dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list