Re: Plib, shared libraries issue.

Bradley Smith skrev: 1. Should these shared libraries be built, or should it just stick to static libraries as upstream intended? There are advantages and disadvantages with either... I don't really have a strong opinion myself (as long as the result works). But if I had to choose, I'd

Re: Plib, shared libraries issue.

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 02:36:17PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote: Bradley Smith skrev: 1. Should these shared libraries be built, or should it just stick to static libraries as upstream intended? There are advantages and disadvantages with either... I don't really have a strong opinion myself

Re: Plib, shared libraries issue.

Mike Hommey skrev: On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 02:36:17PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote: Bradley Smith skrev: 1. Should these shared libraries be built, or should it just stick to static libraries as upstream intended? There are advantages and disadvantages with either... I don't really have a strong

Plib, shared libraries issue.

Hi, I'm currently in the process of adopting plib and would like some advice regrading it's shared/static libraries. Upstream, plib is built as a set of static libraries due to the nature of it's use, i.e. a set of helper libraries that programs will only use part of. The Debian package