Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
PO
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>There are several reasons we prefer dynamic linkage:</p> <ol> <li><p><strong>Licensing</strong>. This is a particular issue with the LGPL, though there are other licenses with similar strictures. </p> <p>Basically, it's legal for me to send you a binary built against LGPL libfoo.so.*, and even to give you a binary for that library. I have a various responsibilities, such as responding to requests for the source for the LGPL'd library, but the important thing here is that I don't have to give you the source for my program, too. Since glibc is LGPL and almost every binary on a Linux box is linked to it, that alone will force dynamic linkage by default.</p></li> <li><p><strong>Bandwidth costs</strong>. People like to say bandwidth is free, but that's true only in principle. In many practical cases, bandwidth still matters.</p> <p>My company's main C++-based system packs up into a ~4 MB RPM, which takes a few minutes to upload over the slow DSL uplinks at most of our customers' sites. We still have some customers only accessible via modem, too, and for those an upload is a matter of "start it, then go to lunch." If we were shipping static binaries, these packages would be much larger. Our system is composed of several cooperating programs, most of which are linked to the same set of dynamic libraries, so the RPM would contain redundant copies of the same shared code. Compression can squeeze some of that out, but why keep shipping it again and again for each upgrade?</p></li> <li><p><strong>Management</strong>. Many of the libraries we link against are part of the OS distro, so we get free updates to those libraries independent from our program. We don't have to manage it.</p> <p>We do separately ship some libraries which aren't part of the OS, but they have to change much less often than our code does. Typically, these are installed on the system when we build the server, then never updated again. This is because we are most often more interested in stability than new features from these libraries. As long as they're working, we don't touch them.</p></li> </ol>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POWhy isn't static linking used more?
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. PTAnswer
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. USWarren Young
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. COIANAL but I don't think you have to give the source code to your code that links with an LGPL library, even if you use static linking.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USdsimcha
    2. COThe only alternative I'm aware of is to give your users a pile of object files and a linker, so they can relink the program against a different version of the library. Without either the source or the objects, your users cannot exercise the main freedom LGPL gives them, which is the ability to replace the library.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USWarren Young
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload