On Fri, 2002-03-22 at 10:34, Miguel Rodríguez wrote: > El vie, 22-03-2002 a las 10:22, Kilian Krause escribió: > > Hi Miguel, > > > > MR> Even if you manage to make a static version of the executable, > > you'll MR> still need some programs from GNOME 1.4, these are gconf and > > oaf. MR> GnomeMeeting cannot run properly without them. > > > > hehe, right.. your point.. =) so, well, what do you propose? > > > > i still think that a 'standalone' installer-version would be nice.. but > > it's true i forgot the binary dependencies... > > > USe a good distro that doesn't have problems with dependencies (debian?, > hint, hint). > A standalone installer-version doesn't make sense in the linux world (at > least IMHO). There is always a place for static binaries. First of all, they are far easier to run under emulation, for instance on a solaris/BSD/other-x86 machine without having to emulate lots of realtime linking stuff. Secondly, it makes it even easier for users on multiuser machines to run the program from their homeaccounts without having to ask the friendly sysadmin to add lots of "unknown" rpm's to a perfectly working system. Thirdly, if there ever is a gcc2.96-mixup, a major glibc-revision or other external factor that affects the way dynamic linking is done, or if the pwlib/h323-development pushes forward while GM doesn't, at some point your ability to run GM will be lost. There are definite advantages to dynamic linking, such as speed and upgradeability, but there always is aflip side to the coin. -- Janne Johansson jan johansson biomatsys com BioMat Systems AB Klarabergsg 37 3tr 111 21 Stockholm
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part