Author rb
Recipients movement, rb, schmir
Date 2008-11-28.09:10:22
SpamBayes Score 0.000738945
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1227863428.06.0.32111948414.issue4434@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
The problem, and the reason for the existence of this bug, is that I
cannot build a shared object that links to libpython2.5.so.1 and works.

Please don't mark this bug invalid until this problem is fixed.

My proposal of adding dependencies to lib-dynload/*.so is just a
suggestion on how to go about fixing this bug. If this is not a suitable
solution, please suggest a solution that is.


In response to your discussion on why the static library is currently
useful, you haven't really answered the question. In what circumstance
would someone actually want to build against the static library and then
dynamically load other libraries?

"Because it works" isn't an answer, as if this bug were fixed, then
building against the shared library would validly have the same response.

Why static over dynamic, if when static you have to link to dynamic anyway?
History
Date User Action Args
2008-11-28 09:10:28rbsetrecipients: + rb, movement, schmir
2008-11-28 09:10:28rbsetmessageid: <1227863428.06.0.32111948414.issue4434@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2008-11-28 09:10:27rblinkissue4434 messages
2008-11-28 09:10:25rbcreate