[Techtalk] Re: Linux Versions

[Nils Philippsen]

On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 04:44, Poppy wrote:

> I dunno about that. The one complaint I have about RPMs is that I'd like
> to see more static ones, I've come into some hairy dependency issues,

Well, having stuff linked dynamically is one of the reasons for a
package manager. I simply don't need to waste disk space with putting
libc code into each and every binary on the system and for that I need
to ensure that I have the needed libraries installed for some program.
Usually a vendor will ensure that a distribution is self-contained, i.e.
that all libraries the programs need are included ;-).

The only drawback is of course finding the package which contains
libfoobar.so.1 -- I can only speak for Red Hat Linux, but there you have
rpmdb-redhat which contains an RPM db of a virtual system having
everything installed. There are two rpm options which query this
database: "--redhatprovides" and "--redhatrequires". So with

rpm --redhatprovides libfoobar.so.1

you should be able to find out which package on the CD you need to
install to get that dependency resolved. As long as you have Red Hat
Linux -- I don't know whether other vendors supply such an rpmdb
package.

Programs should IMO only be linked statically in special cases, like a
statically linked shell for when everything else breaks or likewise.

Nils
-- 
 Nils Philippsen / Berliner Straße 39 / D-71229 Leonberg //
+49.7152.209647
nils at wombat.dialup.fht-esslingen.de / nils at redhat.de /
nils at fht-esslingen.de
        Ever noticed that common sense isn't really all that common?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://linuxchix.org/pipermail/techtalk/attachments/20020505/bdbad73b/attachment.pgp