I agree. There are certainly many cases where static linking makes a lot of sense. The redundancy of statically linking a few self-contained applications can

I agree. There are certainly many cases where static linking makes a lot of sense. The redundancy of statically linking a few self-contained applications can be negligible and the reduced administrative burden can be a great value. But a hypothetical future Rust-heavy distribution, with hundreds of programs, may be an exception. I sometimes wonder what a lightweight "Rusty" distribution for consumer electronics applications might look like. You can go a long way with the Busybox monolithic binary approach, but that might be a pain for development and software updates at some point.