Re: Why no static GLIB/GLIB2 libraries?

["Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports)" <yselkowitz at users dot sourceforge dot net>]

-----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.

If you particularly need glib-1.2 static also, then let me know.


Yaakov
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDubwapiWmPGlmQSMRAoOsAKCfAKNcaJDOLC6l47CnvigzM4UepACgyeJf
n9pGBPpg12NyS5FYJqnEtPk=
=nso9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----