Hi, On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> > If you want to limit people to the config tools in the kernel, there > > is indeed no need for a shared library. Note that during the next > > development cycle all graphical front ends are possibly removed. > > Huh? I don't get it. How is a shared library any better than a static > library in this regard? I'm pondering the traditional advantages of > shared libraries, and I cannot think of a single one that matters here. Shared libraries can be loaded dynamically, this means distribution can package the graphical front ends and the user doesn't need to install huge development packages. bye, Roman ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en _______________________________________________ kbuild-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kbuild-devel
