[Xorg] shared vs static libraries

[Roland Mainz]

Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> 
> Roland Mainz wrote:
> > No, that's not possible. We would have to gurantee backwards
> > compatibility to the old version (at least the commercial Unices may
> > require that), either via lots of #ifdef in the code or via storing the
> > old code in a seperate dir. The mess with libXaw6 vs. libXaw7 is a good
> > example of this nightmare.
> 
> This commercial Unix vendor no longer ships any static libraries.  If it's
> not stable enough yet, we just won't ship it, shared or static.

Erm... I wasn't even thinking about shipping it right now, regardless
whether it's shared or static.
Even Mozilla and Qt link XprintUtils currently statically for the same
reason: The API isn't stable yet... they even have their own (forked)
copies of the code right now. IMO this stuff should be treated as helper
libraries for the tools in the X.org tree (instead of symlinking the
files into the single tool directories).
If someone wants other examples for this: liblbxutil isn't a shared
library either...

----

Bye,
Roland

-- 
  __ .  . __
 (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org
  \__\/\/__/  MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
  /O /==\ O\  TEL +49 641 7950090
 (;O/ \/ \O;)