Re: Static linked cross tools

[Dan Kegel <dank at kegel dot com>]

Marius Groeger wrote:
> > We want to build the executables statically linked so they can run on 
> > different workstations. Typically we put the development tools on a 
> > server and everyone uses the same toolchain. This does not mean that 
> > we do not want to create dynamically linked programs.
>
>
> Sorry to jump in late, and possibly even be redundant. But I would like 
> to point you to what I said a while ago on this list regarding this. 
> Please see
>
>   http://sources.redhat.com/ml/crossgcc/2004-04/msg00003.html
>
> FWIW, we have (almost) completely abandonded static linking, as it does 
> not serve the purpose to get reliable binaries for ANY workstation. It 
> is much safer to let references resolve dynamically until the point 
> where it just doesn't work.

Marius, you're right in general, but for toolchains,
the problems you note with static executables do
not seem to be an issue.  (gcc doesn't do any networking,
for instance, so it doesn't matter that the DNS calls
won't work).  Or have you run into problems with statically
linked copies of *gcc* (as opposed to, say, Mozilla :-)?
- Dan

--
Trying to get a job as a c++ developer?  See http://kegel.com/academy/getting-hired.html

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com