3 ms·
If you wish to distribute binaries rather than source for users to compile, you can not rely on the system libraries because that can get updated in a non compa
by yoz-y 10y ago
If you wish to distribute binaries rather than source for users to compile, you can not rely on the system libraries because that can get updated in a non compatible manner any time. Thus you need to package all of them all the way up from libc with your application (basically what windows and macOS apps do). So in regards to the original criticism of elementary not being updated often enough, I do not think it is an issue for development because it gives you a longer living target. As long as you get the security updates.
- rbanffy 10y agoUsually distros don't change libraries in dangerous ways within a major release. For Debian, "stable" remains as it is for a very long time and even "testing" doesn't change much. Red Hat also maintains the environment stable to a fault. If you want to package for Ubuntu and Fedora, you'll have to probably build for every six-month/one-year release.
- yoz-y 10y agoWe agree. That is why I think that elementary not having the latest greatest libraries (it is an ubuntu lts under the hood) is not a problem and more of a benefit.