OK to merge the fw? libraries in framework?

Lubos Lunak l.lunak at suse.cz
Wed Feb 8 15:09:21 PST 2012

On Wednesday 08 of February 2012, Michael Stahl wrote:
> On 08/02/12 18:10, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> > Is there any fundamental problem in just shoving all the objects in
> > framework into one library (for instance the "fwk" one, or one renamed
> > to the perhaps more logical name "framework")?

 Not perhaps, certainly :).

> AFAIK this module caused huge problems when gbuild-ifying on Windows
> (specifically because of the weird DLLPUBLIC things going on there), so
> in any case please test if it works on Windows before pushing such a
> change.
> > My guess is that the framework code might originally have gone into
> > just one shared library, anybody know the reason why it was split up
> > into five separate ones?
> hmm... no idea, perhaps mba remembers the rationale?
> oh, one thing: probably some libs are required at startup and others
> not; so merging all in one brings a startup performance penalty (but
> even then 2 libs should be enough?)

 I don't think there would be a noticeable penalty if the libraries were 
merged into one. They all link the same libraries according to ldd (except 
for some intra-dependencies), and they all together are less than 5M, so 
probably reading it all in one go may be in fact more efficient. But I cannot 
find something that would actually link libfwk [*], which is 3M, so at least 
merging the other 4 definitely makes sense even from performance point of 

 I can't comment on other reasons why this might have been split though.

[*] Seriously, I can't find a thing. Is there actually something using the 

 Lubos Lunak
 l.lunak at suse.cz

More information about the LibreOffice mailing list