Proposal: Deprecate static dlopen

[Adhemerval Zanella]

On 22/12/2017 16:54, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 12/22/2017 05:05 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> See this thread for some background:
>>
>> Â  https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2017-12/msg00521.html
>>
>> The only useful application for dlopen is access to NSS functionality because static dlopen binaries are more tightly tied to a specific glibc version than dynamically linked binaries.  If we provide NSS access through a helper program (e.g., a special mode of getent), then the need for dlopen goes away, and static linking even becomes more usable.
> 
> This works for me.
> 
> It's good to start setting expectations early.
> 
> Mixing static and dynamic linking has caused us nothing but problems.
> 

I agreed with this as well.