On 1/26/07, David J. Orman <ormandj at corenode.com> wrote:
> I think my core point isn't so much about the method to the madness (I'm sure
> much more intelligent people than myself can come up with a much more
> feasible engineering solution) - it's more of a usability-perspective
> suggestion. I have lots of issues building things on the servers, because
> invariably X software requires Y library, etc. Things like
> OpenPKG/Blastwave/SunFreeware "take care" of this, but then I am stuck with
> whatever options they choose to compile with. By my little hybrid
> ports/package system, you would be able to build the packages with the
> options you wanted, and be *sure* your library versions were compatible.
>
It sounds like you are advocating letting each application
carry it's own libraries along with it. If that is the case, and you
are compiling your own applications, why not just make them static
instead of dynamic binaries ? You've already lost the efficiencies of
the shared libraries if you are including your own libraries anyway.
That is what I have done (with 10's not thousands of servers) when I
need to compile on one system and deploy to others that may not be at
the same exact patch level.
--
Paul Kraus
