5 ms·
> Achieve better memory footprint than heavyweight distros using dynamic linking and all its problems If this is really effective in reducing executable size,
by lutusp 10y ago
> Achieve better memory footprint than heavyweight distros using dynamic linking and all its problems
If this is really effective in reducing executable size, it's supremely ironic, since the original point of dynamic linking was to reduce the overall size of groups of executables by sharing common function libraries.
- loup-vaillant 10y agoMore likely, they're saying mainstream distros are so bloated even dynamic linking can't save them: dynamic linking does reduce memory footprint, but that only mitigates bloat.
- mbel 10y agoI think that "dynamic linking and all its problems" imply that some of the bloat comes from the dynamic linking itself. At least that's how I read it. I believe argument here goes beyond the sole fact of introducing dynamic linker and includes the fact that dynamic linking may encourage duplication of functionality in applications ending up in bloated system (on the other hand static linking doesn't seem to do anything to discourage bloat).
- loup-vaillant 10y agoI've read around here that static linking allow compilers to remove dead code (unused symbols) from the relevant libraries. The same cannot be done for shared libraries, because you never know which symbols are unused —if any.